Political Geography: Europe / Content Type: Policy Brief

1. Exploring options for advancing Kosovo-NATO relations

Author:: Ramadan Iazi and Jeta Loshaj
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Kosovar Centre for Security Studies (KCSS)
Abstract:: NATO’s role in Kosovo has been vital since the 1999 intervention and KFOR remains integral for guaranteeing security and stability not only in Republic of Kosovo but also the wider Western Balkans. Public sentiment for full NATO membership is extremely high in Kosovo—over 90% support—reflecting Kosovars’ enduring trust in the NATP alliance. However this overwhelming public support can be affected if Kosovo’s aspirations for closer ties with NATO are not addressed. While, Kosovo’s formal progress toward full membership is politically constrained by the fact that four NATO member states have yet to recognize its independence, there are other options that NATO can pursue to advance relations with Kosovo. In this context, this paper explores options how can Kosovo and NATO advance relations and cooperation. The 1995 study provides core principles for options that are examined in this paper. These principles remain highly relevant for Kosovo. While formal membership is stalled by non-recognizing NATO member states, the paper argues that an inclusive, step-by-step approach can be adapted for a flexible, deeper engagement with Kosovo. A central recommendation is the creation of a “Kosovo Enhanced Cooperation Initiative,” a tailored version of NATO’s partnership mechanisms (e.g., Partnership for Peace, Planning and Review Process, and the Euro-Atlantic Disaster Response Coordination Centre). KECI would aim to strengthen Kosovo’s defense institutions, enhance interoperability, support civil emergency preparedness, and develop broader crisis-management capabilities. Crucially, it would not force any change in the political stance on recognition among NATO member states. The EU-facilitated normalization dialogue between Republic of Kosovo and Serbia is one of the essential elements especially for Kosovo to build the confidence of both skeptical NATO member states and international partners when it comes to Euro-Atlantic integration process of the country. Regular coordination with NATO and the EU, particularly concerning sensitive actions in the north, would affirm that Kosovo’s leaders prioritize strategic partnerships and diplomacy over moves that risks and undermine support for Kosovo. Nevertheless, without any concrete carrots such as anything close to a guarantee that Kosovo gains an open perspective for NATO’s PfP, it is rather difficult for Kosovo to be encouraged to deliver on either an agreement with Serbia or any other agreement.
Topic:: Security, NATO, Partnerships, Normalization, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:: Europe, Kosovo, and Serbia

2. Russia’s Shadow War Against the West

Author:: Seth G. Jones
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:: Russia is conducting an escalating and violent campaign of sabotage and subversion against European and U.S. targets in Europe led by Russian military intelligence (the GRU), according to a new CSIS database of Russian activity. The number of Russian attacks nearly tripled between 2023 and 2024. Russia’s primary targets have included transportation, government, critical infrastructure, and industry, and its main weapons and tactics have included explosives, blunt or edged instruments (such as anchors), and electronic attack. Despite the increase in Russian attacks, Western countries have not developed an effective strategy to counter these attacks.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Intelligence, Geopolitics, Russia-Ukraine War, and Transnational Threats
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, and United States of America

3. EU’s Strategic Net-zero Technology Promotion Policies and Global Supply Chains

Author:: Youngook Jang
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:: This brief examines recent trends in the EU's industrial and trade policies related to net-zero strategic technologies and their supply chains. It then analyzes the impact of these policies on global supply chain reshaping. As a major player in global supply chains and an active participant in the transition to a net-zero economy, the EU has recently been promoting industrial competitiveness through various industrial and trade policies. Quantitative analyses imply that these policies will likely increase intra-EU trade and reduce extra-EU trade. Korea should respond and adapt to changes in the global trade environment by drawing up Korean industrial policies using EU examples as a reference.
Topic:: Science and Technology, European Union, Trade Policy, Supply Chains, and Net Zero
Political Geography:: Europe and South Korea

4. No One-Size-Fits-All: Outreach and Counselling for Irregular Migrants

Author:: María Belén Zanzuchi
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:: Tackling irregular migration to Europe has long been high on the EU agenda. The strategies proposed and adopted for addressing this issue have evolved over time, resulting in an increasingly diverse set of tools. These include strengthened border controls, voluntary and forced return efforts, new legal pathways to offer alternatives to irregular movement, and regularization. In recent years, European countries have also added to the toolkit to address irregular migration by conducting outreach and counselling for specific groups of irregular migrants. The reasons include informing them about available return and reintegration support, raising the visibility of pathways out of irregularity (such as regularization options, where they exist), and ensuring all members of a society have access to certain essential services. As interest and investments in this area grow, this MPI Europe issue brief explores the diversity of initiatives, actors, and practices in this field. It draws, among other sources, on interviews with government and nongovernmental stakeholders in eight European countries (Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom) and on roundtable discussions among public officials, local administrations, civil-society actors, and representatives of nongovernmental organizations.
Topic:: Civil Society, European Union, Investment, Irregular Migration, and Regularization
Political Geography:: Europe

5. Connecting Opportunities: Greece’s Strategic Role in the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC)

Author:: Dimitris Gavalas and George Dikaios
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:: This policy brief discusses the role of Greece in the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), focusing mainly on those aspects related to infrastructure and ports and the global supply chain. It suggests a series of different actions and highlights different angles that Greece should take into account if it wants to be a major player in the establishment of the Corridor and its gateway to Europe/European Union. – IMEC will be a game changer in international trade relationships, regional tensions, and political challenges. – The main obstacles to IMEC’s establishment are the conflicts in the Middle East and other major national interests of key actors (such as the Chinese monopoly in the region). – Focus is given to port infrastructure, as ports are pivotal to the global supply chain. India pays significant attention to its ports, while the Port of Piraeus is the largest port in Eastern Europe. – The critical role and position of Greece are highlighted, underlying its role as a hub that connects India and the Middle East to Europe. – Greece needs to invest in infrastructure development, build a skilled workforce, and attract foreign investments. – Suggestions for establishing a successful commercial corridor between India and Greece are given, focusing on mutual interests and growth opportunities.
Topic:: Security, Foreign Policy, Trade, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:: Europe, Middle East, India, and Greece

6. Destined for Division? US and EU Responses to the Challenge of Chinese Overcapacity

Author:: Salih Bora, Mary Lovely, and Luis Simón
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:: Heightened concerns about China’s exports have intensified competitive pressures on producers and compelled American and European policymakers, government officials, and political leaders to try to counteract those concerns. President Donald Trump’s decision to raise tariffs on China by 145 percent is the most recent—and arguably most dramatic—example of broader concerns about Chinese overcapacity. The clash with China is particularly evident in sectors that US and European leaders have deemed essential for growth and security, charging that Chinese industrial subsidies, rather than comparative advantage, are the basis for the country’s export success. However, the European Union and the United States have taken different approaches to resolve tensions with China. The European Union seeks, at least for now, to preserve and adhere to global trading rules. By contrast, the United States has acted unilaterally (even before the second Trump administration) to defend its domestic production by engaging in a trade confrontation with China that, together with China’s retaliation, has rattled global financial markets. This Policy Brief explores these EU-US divisions, their reflection on trade and industrial policy, and prospects for coordinated action against Chinese overcapacity. The authors argue that the European Union can take the lead toward a resolution within the rules-based system while maintaining an open door to future US participation.
Topic:: European Union, Tariffs, Exports, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:: China, Europe, North America, and United States of America

7. Issue brief: A NATO strategy for countering Russia

Author:: Ian Brzezinski
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Atlantic Council
Abstract:: Russia is the most direct and significant threat to the security of NATO member states—and since Moscow’s invasion of Georgia in 2008 this threat continues to grow. It now encompasses the war in Ukraine, the militarization of the Arctic, hybrid warfare, and violations of arms control treaties. While NATO holds a significant advantage over Russia in military and economic power, an effective and unified strategy is needed to counter Russia’s aggression and fully harness the Alliance’s collective capabilities. To effectively counter Russia, NATO must defeat Russia in Ukraine, deter Russian aggression against NATO allies and partners, contain Russian influence beyond its borders, and degrade Russia’s ability and will to accomplish its revisionist agenda. That will require, among other actions, a significant increase of support and commitment to Ukraine’s defense against Russia, and a more robust Alliance force posture including the modernization of its nuclear deterrent, the permanent stationing of brigade elements along NATO’s eastern frontier and increased defense industrial capacities.
Topic:: Defense Policy, NATO, Intelligence, International Organization, National Security, Science and Technology, Cybersecurity, Deterrence, Resilience, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

8. The Future of European Digital Competitiveness

Author:: Oscar Guinea and Vanika Sharma
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: Former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi’s recent report on Europe’s competitiveness lays bare the negative effects of overregulation in the EU economy and the underperformance of its digital sector. However, Draghi failed to draw connections between these two phenomena. The future of Europe’s competitiveness is inextricably linked to the future of its digital economy. Unfortunately, the economic contribution of Europe’s Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector remains significantly smaller than that of the US ICT sector to the US economy. There are well-known reasons behind this divergence. Chief among them is the lack of sufficient investment in Europe’s intangible and tangible assets. Regulation, particularly those regulations governing the digital economy, has emerged as a key factor that restricts Europe’s usage of digital technologies and hinders subsequent productivity growth. The EU now has nearly 100 tech-focused laws, comprising thousands of pages, provisions, and restrictions. This must change. The EU should develop a joint plan for digitalisation and competitiveness. This plan should build upon Europe’s comparative advantages: openness, strong institutions, the rule of law, robust intellectual property protections, and high levels of human capital. Above all, the EU must recognise that, while protecting consumer rights, EU policies and regulations must also prioritise the competitiveness of Europe’s ICT sector and promote the widespread adoption of digital technologies across the entire EU economy.
Topic:: Markets, European Union, Digital Economy, and Economic Competition
Political Geography:: Europe

9. Quantum Technology: A Policy Primer for EU Policymakers

Author:: Oscar Guinea, Dyuti Pandya, Oscar du Roy, and Andrea Dugo
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: Quantum technology is rapidly emerging as a transformative force with the potential to reshape industries ranging from finance and pharmaceuticals to automotive and aerospace. In 2024 alone, investments in quantum technology reached over USD 56 billion. Its development, however, presents unique geopolitical challenges, stemming from its applications in defence and encryption, as well as its power to unsettle established comparative advantages and market specialisations across countries. Against this backdrop, an open and collaborative approach to quantum innovation is critical for maximising the benefits of this technology. Countries perform more effectively in quantum technology when they support cross-border collaborations and market specialisation. Firms producing quantum hardware or software solutions can sell to a range of industrial users who, in turn, integrate these cutting-edge systems into goods and services. Such synergy reduces the overall risks and costs of R&D, as different partners share both the financial burden and any uncertainties related to the commercial viability of quantum applications. Moreover, collaboration fosters a wider diffusion of quantum technologies. As firms specialising in quantum computing, communication, or sensing deepen their expertise, their insights permeate adjacent sectors through the shared knowledge enabled by joint collaborations. Conversely, restrictive policies that limit interaction between domestic and foreign firms risk stifling innovation. Self-reliance strategies reduce opportunities for knowledge-sharing, limit the pool of potential partners, and ultimately slow the pace of quantum breakthroughs. This operating framework supports the current EU approach to quantum technology, which emphasises openness and encourages a higher number of collaborations between EU and non-EU companies. This approach is grounded in economic realities: the EU ranks second only to the US in terms of the number of companies and collaborations between firms and it thrives on partnering with non-EU countries as the number of collaborations with companies outside the EU far exceeds the number of collaborations within the EU.
Topic:: European Union, Digital Economy, Digital Policy, and Quantum Computing
Political Geography:: Europe

10. Cybersecurity at Risk: How the EU’s Digital Markets Act Could Undermine Security across Mobile Operating Systems

Author:: Matthias Bauer and Dyuti Pandya
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: The EU’s fight against cybersecurity threats risks being undermined by the over-enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA). Article 5(4) could force mobile operating system providers to allow unregulated external links, bypassing critical security controls and exposing millions of smartphone users to cyber threats. The DMA focuses on market structure, overlooking how differences in operating system design affect security vulnerabilities. A one-size-fits-all approach ignores platform-specific security needs, leaving European users exposed to cyber threats. This risks undermining the EU’s economic security agenda, including initiatives like the Cybersecurity Strategy, Cyber Resilience Act, and NIS2 Directive, which aim to strengthen digital defences. The unintended consequences of this regulatory approach are already evident in Apple’s recent decisions to withhold certain features – such as advanced AI functionalities and enhanced app security tools – from the EU market due to DMA-related concerns. As a result, EU consumers face reduced access to innovative technologies, diminished user experiences, and weaker security protections compared to users in other regions. Now, Android, a widely used open-source system, may also be compromised by DMA enforcement, potentially limiting its flexibility, security, and the broader ecosystem of app developers and device manufacturers that rely on its open architecture.
Topic:: European Union, Cybersecurity, Digital Economy, and Digital Markets Act (DMA)
Political Geography:: Europe

11. The Participation of Foreign Bidders in EU Public Procurement: Too Much or Too Little?

Author:: Lucian Cernat
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: This policy brief examines EU public procurement data from the Tenders Electronic Daily (TED) to evaluate foreign bidders’ participation and success in winning EU public contracts. Despite data coverage limitations, the available information shows an increase in foreign participation in both full and partial contracts, with most activity concentrated in a few countries. Countries like the United States, Japan, and Canada focus on securing full contracts, while nations such as Norway and Turkey often engage through partial contracts. Notably, since Brexit, UK bidders have faced a significant decline in market share, benefiting other countries. The main conclusion is that foreign participation via cross-border procurement (Mode 1) – the only one available in the TED database – is not very high. Although it increased over time, it remains relatively modest, mainly due to low participation rates, rather than discriminatory practices. Between 2016 and 2019, only about 7 percent of EU procurement authorities received foreign bids. This fact alone largely explains the low level of cross-border procurement taking place via Mode 1: put simply, there is no winning without trying. Another important conclusion is that a comprehensive assessment of the participation of foreign bidders in EU procurement would require two new key metrics in the TED data collection process to capture the more important yet missing modes of international procurement. Having reliable and comprehensive data is not just an academic pursuit but a necessity for shaping effective EU policy in the face of rising global protectionism in public procurement.
Topic:: European Union, Contracts, and Public Procurement
Political Geography:: Europe

12. EU Export of Regulatory Overreach: The Case of the Digital Markets Act (DMA)

Author:: Matthias Bauer, Dyuti Pandya, and Vanika Sharma
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: The EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) exemplifies the “Brussels Effect,” extending the EU’s regulatory influence beyond its borders and shaping global digital competition policies. While intended to curb the market power of large technology platforms and promote fair competition, its broad, rigid, and pre-emptive approach risks stifling technological development, deterring investment, and creating legal uncertainty, particularly in emerging markets still building digital infrastructure and seeking to attract foreign investment. Large technology firms play a pivotal role in global economic development, driving innovation, infrastructure upgrading, and consumer welfare. However, increasing regulatory scrutiny, particularly under DMA-like frameworks, could inadvertently harm the very markets they help grow by imposing compliance burdens that hinder business expansion and technology diffusion. Countries with weaker institutions and regulatory capacity – such as India, Brazil, South Africa, and other emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) like Indonesia – could face greater risks of regulatory capture, corruption, and enforcement challenges if they replicate the EU’s approach without adapting it to their economic realities (Section 2). A key concern with the DMA is the departure from traditional case-by-case enforcement in competition policy, instead relying on broad, pre-emptive obligations based on ambiguous concepts such as fairness and contestability. This shift reduces legal certainty, increases the risk of inconsistent enforcement, and may inhibit dynamic competition, which is essential for innovation-driven sectors like fintech, e-commerce, ICT, and edtech. By prioritising static over dynamic competition, the DMA could impede technological progress, limiting consumer choice and long-term economic benefits (Section 3). The global adoption of DMA-like regulations risks further regulatory fragmentation and may create unintended consequences, particularly in emerging economies where regulatory frameworks, institutional quality, and market structures differ significantly from the EU. Broad prohibitions on business practices, such as self-preferencing and data-sharing, could limit opportunities for local firms to scale internationally, weaken cybersecurity protections, and reduce incentives for large technology firms to invest in these regions (Section 4). To ensure proportionate and effective competition enforcement, governments outside the EU should prioritise regulatory flexibility and case-by-case assessments over broad, static restrictions. OECD best practices on competition policy emphasise clear objectives, legal certainty, and regulatory proportionality, ensuring that competition enforcement supports, rather than stifles, innovation and investment (Section 5). Moreover, the risks of corruption and regulatory overreach in developing countries make broad ex-ante regulations especially problematic. Excessive discretionary power granted to local authorities could increase the risk of politically motivated enforcement, deter foreign investment, and undermine long-term economic growth. A more effective approach would be to strengthen institutional frameworks, enhance transparency, and adopt supply-side policies that support technology neutrality, free trade, and economic freedom.
Topic:: Science and Technology, European Union, Regulation, Digital Markets Act (DMA), and Economic Competition
Political Geography:: Europe

13. Trade in the Great Sea: The Future of EU-Southern Neighbourhood Trade Relations

Author:: Jan A. Micallef
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: This policy brief looks into the future of EU-Southern Mediterranean trade relations. It evaluates the current trade and contractual instruments governing these relations and asks if they are sufficient or if more is needed to exploit trade opportunities and manage trade challenges in the region. The policy brief shows why and how the current trade instruments are no longer sufficient. There are two main reasons for this: first, they do not really tackle areas such as services, investment and non-tariff measures (NTMs), all of which are important to unlock economic value for both sides in today’s economy; and second, new economic and political developments reinforce the need for better agreements. As trade becomes more political and intertwined with other issues such as energy, critical minerals, the environment and industrial policy, it is necessary to improve the agreements and instruments that govern trade. The policy brief lists some of the upgrades in EU-Southern Mediterranean trade agreements that are necessary. However, it also analyses what challenges there are to pursue these upgrades and what can be done to overcome the problems. The policy brief concludes that working towards these aims will be challenging but not impossible if there is the necessary political will on both sides. Both sides should realise that the price of not doing anything might be higher than the effort that is required to bring their trade instruments up to the standards needed.
Topic:: International Relations, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Trade
Political Geography:: Africa and Europe

14. Navigating Geopolitical Realities: The EU’s Strategic Positioning in the South Caucasus and Central Asia

Author:: Tengiz Pkhaladze
Publication Date:: 05-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: This policy brief examines the strategic importance of the South Caucasus and its pivotal role in the European Union’s evolving engagement with Central Asia. The regional landscape, however, remains highly volatile. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has had direct and indirect repercussions for the South Caucasus. Against the backdrop of the war, Moscow continues its efforts to maintain the region within its sphere of influence – through military presence, disinformation, economic leverage, and political interference. Twenty percent of Georgia’s territory remains illegally occupied by Russian forces, while the fragile post-conflict environment following the Second Karabakh War continues to shape relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. While missions such as EUMM in Georgia and EUMA in Armenia reflect the EU’s growing political engagement, they remain limited in scope and capacity, constraining the Union’s ability to address the region’s evolving risks. The EU’s partnerships with South Caucasus countries are characterized by both strategic opportunity and persistent friction. Azerbaijan has become an important energy supplier to the EU, particularly via the Southern Gas Corridor, and is also involved in early-stage renewable initiatives such as the Black Sea Submarine Cable Project. However, the relationship remains complicated by enduring concerns related to governance, human rights, and democratic norms. Georgia, despite receiving EU candidate status in 2023, has prompted growing concern among EU institutions and member states over perceived democratic backsliding and increasing political polarization. The country remains a vital transit hub for the Middle Corridor and a central partner in EU connectivity efforts, but its internal developments have raised questions in Brussels about the sustainability of its European path. At the same time, Georgia continues to be a major target of Russia’s hybrid influence operations, which exploit internal divisions and erode trust in Euro-Atlantic institutions. Armenia, disillusioned with Russia’s security guarantees, is cautiously deepening its engagement with the West. However, the extent of this shift remains contingent on developments in Georgia – given Armenia’s geographic dependence – and on the prospects for a durable peace agreement with Azerbaijan. This policy brief assesses how the EU is managing the tensions between its strategic objectives and its normative commitments in a region increasingly shaped by Great Power rivalry. It concludes with policy recommendations aimed at strengthening the EU’s credibility and effectiveness in both the South Caucasus and Central Asia – advocating for a more coherent, proactive, and principled approach that aligns short-term geopolitical interests with long-term goals for regional stability and integration.
Topic:: European Union, Geopolitics, Strategic Interests, Regional Economy, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Central Asia, and South Caucasus

15. Collective Action in the Netherlands: Why It Matters for the Transposition of the Product Liability Directive

Author:: Oscar Guinea, Dyuti Pandya, and Vanika Sharma
Publication Date:: 06-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: This policy brief explores the implications of the Netherlands’ transposition of the new EU Product Liability Directive (PLD), focusing on its interaction with the Dutch collective action system. As one of the first EU countries to implement PLD and a key hub for mass litigation, the Netherlands offers a compelling case study. Features such as low claim thresholds, opt-out mechanisms, flexible settlements, limited cost-shifting, and the ease of creating litigation-backed entities make the Netherlands particularly attractive for mass claims, reinforcing its reputation as a “litigation magnet.” The new PLD simplifies liability claims, broadens the definition of “product” to include software, digital files, and related services, lowers evidentiary thresholds, extends liability to third-party actions such as cyberattacks, and includes post-market defects. These provisions, combined with the Netherlands’ collective redress regime, are expected to drive a rise in mass litigation. This rise poses particular economic risks for the Netherlands, one of the EU’s most digitised economies. Ranked sixth in digital adoption by Eurostat’s Digital Intensity Index, Dutch firms – especially in finance, insurance, ICT, and manufacturing – may also face growing exposure to collective actions under the PLD, which extends liability across the entire value chain. These sectors account for 27 percent of the value added in the Dutch market economy and are widely recognised as key drivers of economic growth. Increased legal uncertainty may also reduce the Netherlands’ attractiveness to multinational corporations, threatening levels of foreign direct investment and employment, both essential pillars of the Dutch economy. Growing mass litigation may also hinder innovation by redirecting R&D resources toward legal risk management. This is particularly concerning for the Netherlands, one of the EU’s top R&D investors. Drawing on US evidence, large-scale litigation can significantly erode market capitalisation, and based on our estimates, the cumulative loss in value for 31 Dutch companies featured in the EU R&D Scoreboard could reach €5.5 billion under the high-growth scenario. Such declines could impact household wealth, as Dutch households save approximately 14.6 percent of their gross disposable income, of which 20 percent is invested in equity. Pension funds, which also play a central role in Dutch long-term savings, can also hold significant stakes in publicly traded Dutch companies. As a result, the effects of collective actions on the market value of Dutch companies extend beyond corporate balance sheets, posing potential negative consequences for Dutch savers, as well as current and future pensioners. This report was commissioned by the European Justice Forum, a coalition of businesses, individuals and organisations that are working to build fair, balanced, transparent and efficient civil justice laws and systems for both consumers and businesses in Europe.
Topic:: European Union, Economy, Litigation, and Liability
Political Geography:: Europe and Netherlands

16. Strengthening the Supply-Side Innovation in EU Telecommunications

Author:: Fredrik Erixon, Oscar Guinea, and Dyuti Pandya
Publication Date:: 06-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:: The telecommunications sector is central to the EU’s competitiveness, not only providing the infrastructure that underpins digital connectivity but also serving as a key driver of innovation. Recent EU reports already highlight the persistent structural challenges faced by the EU telecommunication sector: market fragmentation, low investment levels, divergent spectrum policies, and an urgent need to bolster digital sovereignty. However, a critical dimension in this discussion often receives far less attention: the supply of the underlying technologies that power telecommunications infrastructure. In this domain, EU companies remain competitive. In 2023, 27 EU-headquartered firms were among the world’s top 2,000 R&D spenders in telecommunications, accounting for 16 percent of global sectoral investment. These figures underscore that, while Europe may lag in investment and infrastructure, it still holds strategic leadership in telecom innovation and technology development. Central to Europe’s success are standard development organisations (SDOs), technical standards, and Standard Essential Patents (SEPs). SDOs provide collaborative forums where companies jointly develop technical standards that ensure interoperability, reduce fragmentation and foster innovation. Complementing this, SEPs protect the innovations embedded within these standards, granting European companies vital licensing revenues that sustain their research efforts. This system is particularly important for EU firms, which tend to be smaller than their global competitors; it enables them to specialise in cutting-edge technology development and commercialise their innovations globally without needing to dominate manufacturing or end-user markets. As competitiveness in telecommunications increasingly depends on the pace and adoption of innovation, the EU faces both a challenge and an opportunity. European firms have the potential not only to supply critical technologies but to drive breakthroughs in connectivity which are linked to the development of other technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) or quantum technologies. However, to stay competitive, the EU must reinforce its position on the supply side, where its companies still operate at the technological frontier.
Topic:: Economics, European Union, Digital Economy, Innovation, and Supply and Demand
Political Geography:: Europe

17. Fast, Fair, Funded and Feminist: A pathway to a just and transformative climate transition within and beyond the UK

Author:: Natalie Shortall, Chiara Ligouri, and Ruth Mayne
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:: The world is in the grip of a climate emergency. Urgent and equitable action is essential to prevent yet further escalating climate impacts that are devastating communities worldwide and to safeguard a liveable planet for future generations. For governments everywhere, including the UK Government, this is a defining test of leadership. But it is also a moment of opportunity—an opportunity to build economies and societies that are not only decarbonised and climate resilient, but that actively reduce inequalities, are more inclusive, and prioritise the wellbeing of people and the planet over short-term profit. In this report, we outline key steps the UK Government can take to lead the way toward a just and transformative transition—one that not only stabilises the climate but also delivers fairness and justice for all.
Topic:: Climate Change, Government, Transition, Climate Justice, and Net Zero
Political Geography:: United Kingdom and Europe

18. Raising the Bar: Supermarkets must urgently address structural exploitation of cocoa farmers

Author:: Jesse Arnon and Anouk Franck
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:: Most cocoa farmers in main cocoa producing countries Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana are poor, even though they are at the heart of the supply chain for a luxury good: chocolate. For decades they have been receiving low farm gate prices, which don’t allow them to earn a living income for their families. At the same time, companies in the cocoa and chocolate supply chains have been making huge profits. Supermarkets in the Netherlands and Germany have taken first steps by making long-term commitments to ensuring cocoa farmers are paid a living income reference price, but the share of honest chocolate they have on offer only reaches 5%. It’s time that they radically change the way they do business, by committing to long-term fair prices for farmers, sharing the risk with cocoa farmers and being accountable for all the chocolate products they sell. This paper focuses on supermarkets, which are powerful actors in the cocoa and chocolate supply chain. As primary retailers, supermarkets have a direct link with consumers and have power across the supply chain so they can drive real change. Dutch and German supermarkets have made living income commitments, and they have started implementing them.
Topic:: Human Rights, Business, Cocoa, Farming, Living Income, and Supermarkets
Political Geography:: Europe, Germany, Netherlands, and Global Focus

19. No Women, No Peace – A Snapshot of Oxfam’s Engagement with the Women, Peace and Security Agenda: Lessons and Opportunities

Author:: Marie Sophie Petersson, Lydia Ayikoru, Souhadou Diasso, Fatma Jaffer, and Moath Jamal
Publication Date:: 06-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:: This briefing paper summarizes the important lessons learned since 2018 by Oxfam Denmark and the wider Oxfam confederation while promoting the women, peace and security (WPS) agenda and supporting WPS programming in Burkina Faso, Colombia, Ghana, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Niger, the Occupied Palestinian Territory, South Sudan, Syria, Uganda, Ukraine and Yemen, including under the Danish International Development Agency (Danida) strategic partnerships. It contains practical and policy-level recommendations for international actors working on the WPS agenda in various crisis and conflict contexts globally. The briefing paper shows that supporting and amplifying locally led feminist action by diverse women-led, women’s and LGBTQIA+ rights organizations, networks and groups is a central foundation for peace and justice.
Topic:: Leadership, Crisis Management, Gender, Protection, Localization, Women, Peace, and and Security (WPS)
Political Geography:: Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Global Focus

20. Using data as a production factor: policy ideas for a new EU data strategy

Author:: Bertin Martins
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: A major task for the 2024-2029 European Commission will be to reconcile and simplify the European Union’s range of data-market laws into a more coherent framework. At the heart of the approach should be the non-rival nature of data, meaning it can be used by many parties for many purposes at the same time. That creates the potential for economic efficiency gains from the re-use and aggregation of data. Exclusive private data control rights and high transaction costs may stand in the way of realising these gains. We define economic criteria against which existing data market regulations can be evaluated. These criteria lead to the following recommendations to improve existing EU data regulations: The EU general data protection regulation facilitates re-use of personal data. Machine-readable consent notices and real-time data transfers could reduce high transaction costs that prevent meaningful exercise of informed consent. The European Health Data Space contains an almost-ideal governance regime for health-data re-use and pooling that maximises incentives for data-driven innovation. This regime should be applied to other industrial data-space initiatives. The Data Act facilitates access and re-use of product data but exclusive licensing rights for data holders, monopolistic pricing of third-party data transfers and other anti-competitive measures reduce its impact. Widening its application to services data would make it a truly horizontal data-market regulation. The Digital Markets Act contains several obligations for platforms to grant users access to their own data. Widening access to networked data would facilitate competition between platforms and their users. Mutual instead of unilateral sharing of search-engine data would avoid fragmentation of the search-data pool. The Artificial Intelligence Act imposes unwarranted and costly restrictions on the re-use of copyright-related content data for AI model training data, reducing the innovative impact of AI. The text and data mining exception in the EU Copyright Directive could be broadened to address these new AI technology challenges. EU data market regulations exhibit a tension between exclusive private rights and the realisation of the wider societal value of data. Finding an acceptable balance may involve some redistribution of the efficiency gains between data users and the original data collectors.
Topic:: Markets, European Union, Digital Economy, Microeconomics, Data, and Digital Markets Act (DMA)
Political Geography:: Europe

21. Prepare now: Europe must get ready for the coming long-term care surge

Author:: Svend E. Hougaard Jensen, David Pinkus, and Nina Ruer
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Demographic change and ageing populations in European Union countries will impact many aspects of the economy and have a direct effect on long-term care (LTC) systems. Demand for LTC already exceeds supply in many EU countries, leading to the ‘care gap’. This gap is expected to widen, threatening quality of life for the elderly, exacerbating gender disparities and imposing significant economic costs. The root causes of the gap include demographic shifts, inadequate public investment, workforce shortages and a heavy reliance on informal caregiving. Women stand to lose the most if no steps are taken to prepare LTC systems for the coming surge in demand because care, both formal and informal, is predominantly provided by women. The care gap can be reduced by either increasing the supply of care or by reducing the demand for care. We assess LTC reforms in five EU countries and explain how these can affect the care gap by influencing demand and supply. Governments should: Recognise LTC as a priority. Governments should increase public spending on LTC and make LTC a central policy priority linked to broader goals, including gender equality and economic growth. Expand funding mechanisms. Governments can introduce new means of financing, such as mandatory LTC insurance and pre-funding mechanisms. Most importantly, benefits should target those with the greatest needs, to promote equity and adequacy. Support the workforce more. The LTC sector should be made more attractive by raising wages, improving working conditions and expanding training programmes to attract and retain workers. Develop prevention strategies. EU funds could be directed to research into treatments targeting age-related diseases such as dementia. National governments could invest in public health campaigns and preventive care to reduce future demand. Use the newest technologies. EU countries should invest in robotics and assistive technologies to improve productivity and to reduce physical strain on caregivers.
Topic:: Economics, Health, Governance, European Union, and Macroeconomics
Political Geography:: Europe

22. Not yet Trump-proof: an evaluation of the European Commission’s emerging policy platform

Author:: Heather Grabbe and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The economic strategy being defined by the 2024-2029 European Commission seems to follow the prescriptions on innovation and single market reform, and the expansive approach to industrial policy, set out by Mario Draghi in his September 2024 report on European Union competitiveness, with two important differences. First, the Commission stops short of calling for World Trade Organisation-prohibited subsidies – this is welcome. Second, the Commission proposes a new state aid framework for national industrial policy rather than expansion of EU-level public investment funding. This runs the risk of weakening the single market and harming competition, with the unintended consequence of protecting incumbents and inhibiting structural change. In terms of specific policies, on defence, the Commission is right to face up to the challenge of defining an EU procurement mechanism that offers sufficient speed and cost advantages to justify large-scale funding. On economic security and international partnerships, the Commission is right to take a broader approach than a foreign economic policy focused only on supply chains. What is lacking is a much greater commitment to providing support for climate mitigation in developing countries. The second Trump presidency creates risks for the Commission strategy. President Trump has gone further than expected in threatening territorial expansion and with the speed, aggression and disregard for the rule of law with which he has started to implement his policies. These factors will complicate the EU-United States relationship. The best defence against both Trump and the competitive and security threats posed by China is to accelerate policies that address the EU’s structural weaknesses: raising productivity growth, defence capacity and economic security. Economic security, in turn, requires more resilient trade relationships, less financial dependence on the US and an improved standing with emerging market and developing economies. The EU should also seize the opportunity offered by the shift in US policy from subsidies to deregulation. While the EU should not race Trump to the bottom on environmental or financial deregulation, it should rapidly improve its own regulatory framework while building on its core strengths: human capital and the rule of law. Unlike tariff wars or discriminatory subsidies, a competition to provide a good business environment is not a zero-sum game.
Topic:: Security, Economics, Industrial Policy, Budget, European Union, Digital Economy, Trade Policy, Donald Trump, Sustainability, European Commission, and Energy
Political Geography:: Europe and United States of America

23. Upgrading Europe's electricity grid is about more than just money

Author:: Conall Heussaff and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Electricity network investment is essential for the energy transition, with annual investments of tens of billions of euros required across Europe. Network companies are already investing such amounts and delivering efficient grid investments requires more than additional money. Assessing infrastructure needs is the first step in grid investment. At local, national and European Union levels, network development planning is determined by policy choices and can greatly affect the efficiency of investments. Coordinated grid planning is crucial to set the right incentives for the efficient development of the European electricity system. An EU independent system operator could assume responsibility for network planning by providing regular, independent assessment of efficient network investment needs from a holistic European perspective. Although significant capital expenditure is undoubtedly necessary, network regulation should encourage network companies to invest in the most-efficient solutions. Current regulatory approaches may favour traditional capital expenditure, leading to system inefficiencies and higher-than-necessary consumer costs. Cross-border electricity transmission infrastructure is critical to integrate renewables into the electricity system at scale and reduce costs for European consumers. But such projects are often not built or are delayed because those that decide on and pay for the infrastructure are not necessarily those that benefit from it. A European fund could smooth negotiations between parties and accelerate the physical interconnection of the European electricity system. Fairly recovering the costs of grid investments from consumers is vital to maintain public support for the energy transition. National funds could smooth out cost impacts over time, keeping electricity affordable throughout the energy transition.
Topic:: Climate Change, Electricity, Decarbonization, and Energy Security
Political Geography:: Europe

24. How to improve the European Union’s sustainable finance framework

Author:: Silvia Merler
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The European Union has sought to steer corporate behaviour to support its climate goals by adopting a large body of rules on sustainable investment, sustainability disclosures and sustainability labelling of financial products, underpinned by a taxonomy of activities considered sustainable. It is unclear, however, if this effort has had significant results. Examination of financial market data and metrics of investment flows towards green and sustainable investment shows up several weaknesses – both contingent and structural – in the EU sustainable finance framework, which could limit its effectiveness in aligning capital flows with climate objectives. The Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) is aimed at making the sustainability content of financial products more transparent but rests on a concept of ‘sustainable investment’ that is too broad and loosely defined. Meanwhile, the EU Taxonomy Regulation has not yet become established as the reference framework for corporate bond issuance or sustainable investing. The EU also lacks a coherent framework for transition finance – or investment that is not yet classified as sustainable but that represents progress to greater sustainability – despite this being the market segment to which the largest volumes of investment will need to flow in the short to medium run. Five adjustments would make the EU sustainable finance framework more effective at delivering the desired alignment of incentives. First, the taxonomy framework should be completed and clarified. Second, the SFDR definition of sustainable investment should be toughened. Third, the neutrality of the framework across capital market instruments, in particular debt versus equity, should be ensured. Fourth, a dedicated framework for transition finance should be developed. Finally, formal sustainable and transition labels for financial products should be introduced. This approach would make the sustainable finance framework more easily applicable to all kind of companies and all types of capital market instruments, regardless of whether they limit the use of proceeds, and it would be naturally extendable into a framework for transition finance and into a transparent sustainability labelling regime for financial products.
Topic:: Climate Change, European Union, Regulation, Finance, Macroeconomics, and Sustainability
Political Geography:: Europe

25. The European Union’s new fiscal framework: a good start, but challenges loom

Author:: Nicolas Boivin and Zsolt Darvas
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The European Union’s fiscal framework, updated in April 2024, aims to strengthen fiscal sustainability and foster public investment. It requires countries to maintain or gradually reduce their public debts to no more than 60 percent of GDP, and ensures compliance with a 3 percent of GDP deficit limit and some safeguards. EU countries must submit Medium-Term Fiscal Structural Plans (MTFSPs) showing how they intend to comply. MTFSPs for most EU countries have now been approved by the European Commission, on the basis that the fiscal paths in the plans are credible and increased public investment is foreseen even amid fiscal consolidation. However, macroeconomic assumptions in MTFSPs frequently deviate from the Commission’s guidance, often reflecting optimistic growth projections. Overly optimistic assumptions risk deviations from approved fiscal paths, while disagreements about macro projections, which are central to debt sustainability analysis, could undermine the framework’s credibility and hinder implementation at a later stage. Several MTFSPs assume higher stock-flow adjustments (SFAs) than included in the Commission’s prior guidance, indicating that these countries must implement somewhat larger fiscal adjustments. Historical data shows large positive SFAs for many countries, suggesting that multi-year-ahead SFA projections should be extended to all countries, based on a transparent methodology. The plans indicate that greater planned fiscal adjustments tend to be associated with deeper cuts to public investment. The overall increase in public investment ratios remains below 0.2 percent of GDP according to the plans and Commission and OECD forecasts. While the EU’s major investment gaps should primarily be addressed through private investment, public investment must also play a role. Innovative approaches, such as a new EU fund financed by common borrowing, are essential to boost investment in the EU. The updated fiscal framework’s long-term success depends on achieving consensus on macroeconomic assumptions, including the standardisation of methods to assess the growth impacts of reforms, while refining SFA methodologies and finding new ways to foster investment. Strengthening these elements will make the framework more credible and effective, enabling it to better guide fiscal policy and support sustainable growth.
Topic:: Governance, European Union, Macroeconomics, and Fiscal Policy
Political Geography:: Europe

26. Europe’s energy information problem

Author:: Ben McWilliams, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Comprehensive information on energy-related topics, such as take-up of heat pumps, industrial natural gas consumption and prices, and battery connections to the electricity grid, is either not available in Europe in a timely manner, or not available at the level of granularity, reliability and consistency needed for informed decision-making. Certain information is simply not collected, while other information is collected but is not comparable or consistent across Europe, or is hard to access. European policy targets, such as greenhouse-gas emission reduction pathways, are evaluated using models for which input assumptions and parameters are not public knowledge. It should be a European Union priority to improve this situation. Doing so will enable better decision-making by policymakers and companies. This is especially relevant when Europe faces the triple challenge of decarbonisation, ensuring security of energy supply and growing its internationally competitive energy-consuming industries. The EU status quo is that good energy information is provided by a mix of institutions, agencies, national bodies, industrial associations and non-governmental organisations, but with substantial room for improvement. Lessons can be learned from the United States Energy Information Administration and the European Environment Agency, which was established to better coordinate climate data. Improving energy information will involve difficult political decisions. A process should be started to evaluate the options and to measure the continued cost of inaction.
Topic:: Climate Change, European Union, Institutions, Green Deal, and Energy
Political Geography:: Europe

27. Europeans still want climate action, but don't trust governments to deliver

Author:: Jan Eichhorn and Heather Grabbe
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The vast majority of Europeans continues to support action to combat climate change, but many are losing faith in governments to deliver a transition that is effective and fair. Based on a large-scale questionnaire answered by nearly 8000 people in five EU countries in 2024, with a comparison to responses from 2020, we find that Europeans continue to worry about climate change and want effective action to combat it, even though the pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine significantly increased their concerns about economic and physical insecurity. Scepticism about the causes of climate change has risen a bit, and concern about adapting to its impact has grown. People across all income groups, particularly in France, Germany, Italy and Sweden, feel negative about the outlook for their economic future and their governments’ ability to improve it. People who feel politically disaffected think that decisionmakers are not taking their views and interests into account when making economic and climate policies. Some people are now shifting their attention away from action against the climate crisis towards adaptation, but this does not mean they are less concerned about climate change. Instead, for some people, it is an expression of their disillusionment with state institutions – and this feeling is present among supporters of parties across the political spectrum. Worry about climate change is equally spread across all socio-economic groups. Closer examination of attitudes in Germany, using evidence from focus groups, which we also discuss in this Policy Brief, reinforces the finding of increasing scepticism about the German government’s ability to manage the climate crisis. If political leaders want the public to continue to support climate policies, they must engage proactively now to avoid even greater loss of confidence in government. If governments go soft on efforts to combat the climate crisis now or delay action, they will not meet voters’ demand for an effective and just transition. Moreover, hesitation and delay would boost populist and far-right actors’ efforts to sow doubt about the causes of climate change and whether policies will be effective.
Topic:: Climate Change, Elections, Populism, and Energy
Political Geography:: Europe

28. Ukraine: European democracy’s affordable arsenal

Author:: Jacob Funk Kirkegaard
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: European NATO members must raise defence spending by enough to deter through strength an irredentist Russia. This must be done possibly without the United States and when ageing populations demand higher social spending. Raising defence spending to sufficient levels could result in a doubling of current primary deficits to just over 3 percent of GDP on average. This seems likely to be a fiscally unattainable goal for this group of countries. European NATO members, in addition to their quantitative defence spending challenge, face the qualitative challenge of significantly increasing their outlays on new modern military equipment, especially drones, to credibly deter Russia. This will require all European NATO members to significantly increase investments in their domestic and regional military-industrial capacities. While its armed forces are physically defending their country against Russia’s onslaught, Ukraine is transforming gradually into a very large, advanced and cost-competitive military equipment and weapons producer. Through the so-called ‘Danish Model’, individual European Union and NATO members are already actively funding Ukrainian defence production, helping it to help itself against Russia. Much more focus should be put on Ukraine’s ability, if fully integrated with the military-industrial sector in the rest of Europe, to produce much of the modern military equipment wanted by itself and the rest of Europe. This Policy Brief shows how Ukraine already produces drones and modern howitzers, arguably the two most important weapons in defensive warfare today, at prices well below those achieved by other Western military suppliers. The EU, with a fully integrated and funded Ukrainian military-industrial sector, will have the capacity to produce much of the cost-competitive military equipment it will need in future, while continuing to fund its welfare systems. To facilitate this development, the EU must in all defence and military-related matters begin treating Ukraine immediately as a full EU member.
Topic:: Security, NATO, Industrial Policy, Governance, European Union, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Europe and Ukraine

29. Reinforcing EU merger control against the risks of acquisitions by big tech

Author:: Mario Mariniello
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Since 2000, online platforms that are now within the scope of the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), have bought nearly 700 small, promising companies worldwide. However, only 19 of their attempted acquisitions were notified to the European Commission, the authority exercising merger control over deals with a substantive EU connection. In the other cases, the acquired target’s turnover did not meet the conditions for merger notification. These acquisitions have happened in the context of digital markets becoming increasingly concentrated, leading to speculation that concentration levels might have been lower had some of those acquisitions not taken place. The harm that the concentration of market power in a handful of American digital companies may cause is magnified by the current position of the United States, which aims to shield platforms from regulatory enforcement. Acquisitions of small companies may have pro- or anti-competitive effects. Established market players may buy startups to become more competitive or to supply a higher quality product or service, ultimately benefitting final users. Mergers may also incentivise innovation and attract venture capital. However, incumbents might also acquire small companies with strategic, anti-competitive objectives. They might want to stop challengers to their market power from emerging in the future. Or they might acquire small companies to prevent competitors from relying on the target’s supply to complement their competing products. Moreover, competition authorities struggle to make accurate predictions about the evolution of competitive dynamics in new and complex markets, such as digital markets. Authorities thus may be unable to take the correct decision, even if the merger is notified. Responding to these issues hinges on amending the DMA. The European Commission should be empowered to scrutinise any acquisition performed by the large platforms within the DMA scope (currently, the DMA requires these platforms to inform the Commission of any intended concentration, but envisages no other action). Moreover, the burden of proving that the merger is not harmful should be shifted to the large platforms. This would leverage market players’ knowledge to help increase the accuracy of merger decisions in a highly dynamic and uncertain environment.
Topic:: Science and Technology, European Union, Microeconomics, Big Tech, European Commission, and Economic Competition
Political Geography:: Europe

30. How DeepSeek has changed artificial intelligence and what it means for Europe

Author:: Bertin Martens
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: By mid-2024, artificial intelligence large language models (LLMs) were running into diminishing returns to scale in training data and computational capacity. LLM training began to shift away from costly pre-training to cheaper fine-tuning and allowing LLMs to ‘reason’ for longer before replying to questions. Fine-tuning uses chain-of-thought (CoT) training data that includes questions and the logical steps to reach correct answers. This increases the efficiency of learning for smaller AI models, such as DeepSeek. CoT data can be extracted from large ‘teacher’ LLMs to train small ‘student’ models. These changes shift the cost structure of AI models from high pre-training costs to lower fine-tuning costs for model developers and more inference costs for users. While smaller models are cheaper to use, a positive AI demand effect is likely to exceed the negative price effect. Price competition between models will increase, resulting in tighter margins for AI firms. Specialised models can still fetch premium prices. Cheaper LLMs are an opportunity for European Union companies to catch up in building smaller AI models and applications on top of LLMs. Increased demand for AI services will require more investment in computing infrastructure, including in the EU. Investing in large LLMs and the corresponding hyperscale infrastructure is riskier, especially as price competition between models increases. Knowledge extraction between AI models puts pressure on model developers to protect their investments against free-riding by others. It also creates a dilemma for policymakers: should they favour free-riding to promote competition and innovation, or should they clamp down and reinforce monopoly rents to stimulate investment in AI models? Past policy will not be an appropriate response in a world that offers vastly expanded opportunities for knowledge pooling and innovation at lower cost.
Topic:: Science and Technology, European Union, Economic Policy, Microeconomics, Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, Large Language Models (LLMs), and DeepSeek
Political Geography:: Europe

31. The demographic divide: inequalities in ageing across the European Union

Author:: David Pinkus and Nina Ruer
Publication Date:: 03-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The European Union is projected to enter a period of population decline after 2026, with implications for economic development and labour markets, though these will vary because of different trends in different EU countries. Between 2023 and 2050, Eastern and Southern EU countries will face the sharpest declines because of both natural population decrease and limited net inward migration. In contrast, Northern and Western countries could see population growth driven by higher migration. By 2050, working-age populations are projected to decline in 22 out of 27 EU countries, while the share of those aged 85+ in the EU as whole will more than double. This shift will strain healthcare, pension and long-term care systems across the continent. Eastern and Southern EU countries will face more severe ageing and workforce shrinkages, undermining their competitiveness and potentially contributing to increasing inequality. Western and Northern countries will also age, but slower natural population decline and larger migration inflows will give them more time to adjust. However, regional disparities within countries will likely widen as migrants concentrate in urban areas, leaving rural regions even more vulnerable to depopulation. Policies must be adapted to these different demographic trends. Eastern EU countries should focus on retaining talent, attracting migrants in sectors with labour shortages and increasing labour-force participation by women and older workers. Southern countries should strengthen family-friendly and youth-employment policies, while improving migrant integration and regional infrastructure. Western and Northern countries must prioritise migrant integration, rural development and gradual labour-market reforms for ageing populations. A coordinated EU plan for these different trends would support EU countries in addressing the challenges they will face. Integration of migrants into labour markets and societies will be especially important, though relying on sustained high migration may not be a viable long-term solution and will not be a substitute for maximising the participation of residents in labour markets.
Topic:: Demographics, European Union, Inequality, and Aging
Political Geography:: Europe

32. Making the best of the new EU Social Climate Fund

Author:: Eva Jüngling, Giovanni Sgaravatti, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The slow pace of decarbonisation of buildings and transportation threatens the European Union’s goal of reducing emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and achieving net zero by 2050. To address this, a new emissions trading system, ETS2, is being introduced to put a carbon price on fuels used in buildings and road transport. However, the resulting cost increases risk a disproportionate impact on vulnerable households and small and medium sized enterprises. The European Union has created the Social Climate Fund (SCF) to address these distributional challenges. This instrument redistributes a portion of auction revenues generated by the ETS2 among EU countries, in order to protect the most vulnerable. A much larger share of ETS2 revenues will flow directly to national governments, offering significant opportunities for social measures and investments in the green transition. The use of those revenues will dictate how successful EU countries are in managing the transition and protecting households, particularly in higher-income member states, which will receive relatively smaller shares of SCF funding. ETS2 is an essential part of the EU climate policy toolkit. Governments should employ good practices, as identified by the European Commission, to tackle emissions from buildings and transport and to gradually phase out income support, in line with the achievement of investment targets and milestones. Higher-income EU countries should develop additional targeted financing levers to protect the vulnerable and to introduce extra enablers to encourage private investment. Proper sequencing, outreach and communication will be essential to ensure the uptake of measures and public support for policy instruments. Cross-country learning should be leveraged, including through the creation of a European policy registry that will help countries compare their approaches and potentially amend their SCF spending plans on the basis of learning from policies that been successful elsewhere.
Topic:: Climate Change, European Union, Welfare, Transportation, Carbon Emissions, Decarbonization, and Protection
Political Geography:: Europe

33. The governance and funding of European rearmament

Author:: Guntram B. Wolff, Armin Steinbach, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Europe faces a grave security threat. Gaps in European military equipment are substantial compared to Russia’s military build-up. The European defence market is fragmented and weakened by home bias in procurement, low order numbers and technological gaps. These problems reflect the combination of past reliance on the United States and Europe’s nationally-based defence governance. With the US now retreating from its role of European guardian, greater cooperation is essential to close technological gaps and reduce rearmament costs. Unless procurement is pooled and fragmentation reduced, additional demand for defence goods will mainly drive up prices. Better-integrated defence markets would both increase competition and facilitate entry of new defence technology firms. The combination of integrated markets and scaled-up procurement could lead to a halving of unit costs. European Union measures including the European Defence Fund, the Act in Support of Ammunition Production, the European Defence Industry Reinforcement through Common Procurement Act and ReArm Europe represent progress towards strengthening the supply of military goods but the incentives offered are too small to address the home bias in procurement or to coordinate the provision of ‘strategic enablers’ such as military satellites. To go further, the EU and its European allies have two options. First, the role of the European Defence Agency could be broadened, possibly in combination with a new lending instrument similar to the EU’s 2020-22 SURE programme. Second, a European Defence Mechanism (EDM) could be created: an institution similar to the European Stability Mechanism, based on an intergovernmental treaty. The EDM would undertake joint procurement and plan for the provision of strategic enablers in specified areas, with a capacity to fund these roles. It could own strategic enablers and charge usage fees to EDM members, reducing the budgetary impact of rearmament. EDM membership would entail prohibition of both state aid and procurement preferences that benefit national defence contractors at the expense of contractors from other EDM members. Of the two options, the second is preferable, as it would (1) create a defence industry single market among EDM members, (2) create a financing vehicle that might make large-scale projects fiscally feasible, and (3) include non-EU democracies such as the United Kingdom on an equal footing, while also giving an opt-out to EU countries that lack the political appetite for more defence integration, or that have national constitutional constraints.
Topic:: Security, Defense Policy, Governance, Geopolitics, Weapons, Macroeconomics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, and United States of America

34. Who should be charged? Principles for fair allocation of electricity system costs

Author:: Conall Heussaff, Eva Jüngling, Simone Tagliapietra, and Georg Zachmann
Publication Date:: 04-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: The high costs in the European Union of supplying electricity can only be structurally reduced through decarbonisation and deeper European electricity system integration. In the short-term, policymakers have few choices. They can redistribute system costs by shifting components from one consumer to another. Another immediate distributional option would be to reduce energy taxation, implicitly shifting costs to the taxpayer. Meanwhile, decision-making processes that translates electricity system costs into final consumer prices are fragmented. Rules on the short-term production, transmission and consumption of electricity are determined at EU level. National regulators and governments determine how the fixed costs of the system are recovered from consumers, while national policymakers also set energy taxes. This Policy Brief sets out options for shifting the fixed costs of the electricity system between consumers, for changing energy taxation to reduce prices and for evaluating systemic trade-offs between system cost and other characteristics, such as sustainability and reliability. We also estimate the quantitative effects of shifting costs between consumers and reducing taxes on electricity. We set out four principles for pricing electricity fairly. Policy interventions in the electricity system should not seek to achieve broader economic objectives at the expense of energy-policy goals. Consumer prices should incentivise efficient system operation. Carbon emissions should be priced in. The fixed costs of the electricity system should be primarily recovered from inelastic consumption. European policymakers should develop transparent analytical tools to assess the distributional effects of electricity-policy interventions. Lessons should be learned from the energy crisis, during which EU and national policies attempted to shield consumers from price impacts, and these lessons should form the basis of ongoing efforts to reduce prices. EU guidelines for electricity cost recovery should be established, following fundamental economic principles, and could form a policy toolbox for national governments to reduce energy prices. Finally, the long-term strategic goal of deeper physical and institutional integration of the European electricity should be pursued to structurally reduce electricity prices.
Topic:: Climate Change, European Union, Electricity, and Energy
Political Geography:: Europe

35. Building coalitions for climate transition and nature restoration

Author:: Jean Pisani-Ferry, Beatrice di Mauro, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Global climate and biodiversity outcomes will largely be determined in emerging and developing economies (EMDEs). We propose a four-pillar strategy to support climate and nature preservation in line with the economic interests of both developing and advanced countries. This would move beyond voluntary pledges to embed climate and nature objectives into the structures of trade, finance and industrial policy, creating a self-reinforcing system of cooperation and reducing the net costs of the green transition. Under Pillar 1, a coalition of advanced and developing countries would link tiered carbon pricing with a common carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM). Pillar 2 would create a climate-finance coalition to decarbonise the power sectors of developing countries. Pillar 3 would involve partnerships to develop clean energy-intensive industrial production stages in developing economies with rich renewables endowments; these would feed into the supply chains of the European Union and other energy-importing advanced economies. Pillar 4 would redesign markets to create scalable and credible mechanisms to fund carbon removals. Technology-based removals can be incentivised through the introduction of clean-up certificates into the EU emissions trading system, while nature-based removals would require improved market design centred on a new asset class: nature shares. The four pillars reinforce each other. A multi-country CBAM and carbon pricing coalition (Pillar 1) would reduce the cost of financing power sector decarbonisation (Pillar 2). Linking EMDE membership of the CBAM and carbon-pricing coalition to financial support for the decarbonisation of power sectors would also make it more attractive for EMDEs to adopt carbon prices. Decarbonisation of power sectors (Pillar 2) would be a precondition for developing clean, highly energy-intensive industry in renewables-rich EMDEs (Pillar 3). The Pillar 1 coalition should include the EU, China and as many other countries as possible. Advanced countries and China could underpin the Pillar 2 financier coalition. Pillar 3 would involve the EU and potentially other energy-poor advanced countries, along with EMDEs that are richly endowed with renewables. Pillar 4 would include the main custodians of the planet’s natural capital. Enabling these coalitions will require EU leadership.
Topic:: Climate Change, Economics, Industrial Policy, Trade, Sustainability, Decarbonization, and Green Transition
Political Geography:: Europe

36. Reconciling the European Union’s clean industrialisation goals with those of the Global South

Author:: Ben McWilliams, Simone Tagliapietra, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Clean industrialisation is a political and economic priority for the European Union. For it to work, affordable clean energy is needed. However, producing this energy in Europe is constrained by limited renewable energy endowments (sunshine and wind) and land availability, while the transportation costs for imported clean energy (in the form of electricity or hydrogen) are much higher than for fossil fuels. An alternative way to fuel Europe’s clean industrial sector would to import energy-intensive primary tradeable products such as ammonia, methanol and reduced iron. We estimate that more than ten percent of total future EU clean energy demand will be met by such products. Public policy in Europe should aim to facilitate trade in energy-intensive intermediate inputs, which are cheaper to import than energy directly. Imports of these inputs could boost the competitiveness of downstream stages in the energy-intensive value chain (such as steel production). By lowering overall energy demand and thus electricity prices, such imports would also raise EU competitiveness more broadly. In many cases, they would replace imports of less energy-intensive commodities such as iron ore, therefore not adding to Europe’s overall import dependency. The direct economic impact in terms of jobs and value added that would be offshored is not substantial. The international benefit of such a strategy would be that it would embed third countries – especially emerging and developing economies – into clean industrial value chains. Stable European demand can help such countries develop export-driven, clean industrial strategies. Politically, this could be an important incentive that could offset the EU’s carbon border adjustment mechanism. Governments should therefore not use taxpayer money to fight the relocation of energy-intensive and tradeable primary products, beyond some minimum threshold that is desirable for economic security and innovation reasons. Meanwhile, ongoing negotiations with third countries to establish Clean Trade and Investment Partnerships should put trade in energy-intensive clean products at the core of new international clean supply chains.
Topic:: Industrial Policy, European Union, Global South, Industrialization, Decarbonization, Energy, and Emerging Economies
Political Geography:: Europe

37. The time is right to make a European Union-India trade deal happen

Author:: Ignacio Garcia Bercero and André Sapir
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Bruegel
Abstract:: Nearly 20 years have passed since the EU and India started negotiations on a bilateral trade and investment agreement. After seven years of intense negotiations, the process stalled in 2014, primarily because of the failure of the respective political leaders to make difficult choices. Talks restarted in 2022 and now offer a reasonable chance of delivering a bilateral free-trade agreement “within the course of the year”, as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared in February 2025. The EU and India both rank among the world’s five largest economies in terms of GDP. Yet much separates the two economically. India’s GDP per capita is much lower than the EU’s, and its level of trade and investment protection is much higher than that of the EU or even its middle-income peers. However, India has recently enjoyed faster growth than any other large economy, including China. The EU and India are also being brought closer by the global geopolitical situation and their common pursuit of strategic autonomy and economic security. The two sides should learn the lessons from past failure and reach an ambitious agreement in areas that previously proved difficult, such as goods tariffs and services, and in new areas, such as climate protection, that could again derail the revived negotiation if not managed well. A deal by the end of 2025 will have economic benefits and will also reinforce the broader economic and political links between the EU and India at a time when world affairs are under severe strain. An ambitious agreement could also help reconstruct a rules-based global order for the new multipolar world. This is particularly important for the multilateral trade and climate regimes, where converging EU and Indian positions could have a major influence on the redesign of international institutions and rules.
Topic:: Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, Governance, European Union, and Trade
Political Geography:: Europe, South Asia, and India

38. The Current State of Energy Security in Europe

Author:: Dan Ziebarth, Johannes Späth, and Cengiz Günay
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: This Policy Analysis examines the state of energy security in Europe. The concept of energy security has been commonly used to refer to the ability to securing uninterrupted access to energy and energy supplies at an affordable price (IEA, World Energy Outlook 2022). Energy security is essential for maintaining economic stability, political security, and social well-being. Although, the classic approach energy security is reducing dependencies through the diversification of energy sources and supplies, energy security also requires robust and resilient infrastructure, political and bureaucratic will, market conditions and cooperation. Building for energy security also entails the right assessment of the existing realities. Europe‘s energy security faces multiple threats and risks. This policy analysis identifies four major threat domains to energy security: (1) geopolitical coercion and cyberattacks; (2) infrastructural and systemic weaknesses; (3) resource scarcity and critical mineral dependency; and (4) political/regulatory fragmentation. The paper argues that over-reliance on diversification (e.g., of imports such as replacing Russian gas with Qatari LNG and diversifying the energy mix through an increase in renewable energy) won‘t be enough. The EU also needs to invest in innovative technologies and infrastructure. The blackout in Spain highlighted the vulnerability of grids to high levels of renewable energy without the necessary adaptations. European energy security requites inclusive and integrated resilience strategies with a whole-of-society approach, technological innovation and cooperation, investment in infrastructure, bureaucratic coordination, and political unity.
Topic:: Infrastructure, Renewable Energy, Resilience, and Energy Security
Political Geography:: Europe

39. Flawed by Design: What al-Sisi’s Egypt Reveals About the Myth of Authoritarian Efficiency

Author:: Johannes Späth
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: This policy analysis challenges the rising narrative that authoritarian regimes, despite their repressive nature, offer superior governance efficiency and contribute to regional stability. Using Egypt under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as a case study, it argues that the perception of authoritarian efficiency is not only analytically flawed but dangerously misleading for international policymakers. European and Western engagement with Egypt continues to rely on flawed assumptions about authoritarian capacity and stability. Financial support, arms sales, and diplomatic legitimacy are extended largely unconditionally, under the illusion that al-Sisi’s regime can deliver long-term order. This approach ignores the structural fragility baked into Egypt’s political economy, and risks enabling a trajectory toward fiscal implosion and social unrest. The paper argues for a strategic recalibration. European policymakers should shift from regime-centered engagement to resilience-centered investment, focusing on areas like education, climate adaptation, and local economic empowerment that outlast regime cycles. Europe’s current approach risks buying short-term quiet at the cost of long-term instability. A policy recalibration grounded in realism, not regime accommodation, is both necessary and overdue.
Topic:: Political Economy, Bilateral Relations, Authoritarianism, European Union, Regime Security, Regional Stability, and Regime Legitimation
Political Geography:: Europe, North America, and Egypt

40. NATO is safe, but for how long? What needs to be taken from the Hague Summit

Author:: Sophie Draeger and Loïc Simonet
Publication Date:: 07-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: The Hague NATO Summit was a success – on the paper. Mark Rutte’s first test as Secretary-General may have avoided the chaos of Trump’s first term, but the outcome reveals deep contradictions in the Alliance. The agreed 5% defence spending target is historic and the final communiqué strikingly short, yet these moves mask rather than resolve NATO’s structural vulnerability. Trump’s transactional view of Article 5 remains the Alliance’s Damocles sword, as America’s long-term commitment to Europe remains in question. The EU, meanwhile, is facing a strategic and identity crossroads. While Trump’s pressure spurs long-overdue momentum toward a stronger European defence posture, it also risks accelerating Europe’s militarization at the expense of its founding peace project. The 'phoney transatlantic bargain' – Europe promises to spend, Trump promises to stay – may hold for now, but cannot guarantee NATO’s credibility in the long run. Amid economic risks and political fragmentation, the EU must act fast to assert its own roadmap, including tying EU funds to defence efforts and planning for U.S. retrenchment. Without this, Europe may find itself simultaneously more militarized and more vulnerable.
Topic:: NATO, European Union, Alliance, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:: Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America

41. The ‘geopolitical’ European Union and the new Transatlantic relation 100 days after Donald Trump’s inauguration: How to navigate the storm?

Author:: Loïc Simonet
Publication Date:: 05-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: Donald Trump’s second administration is a test for the “geopolitical” EU. It comes at a time of morosity and decline in Europe, both in terms of hard and soft power, and reveals EU’s major structural deficiencies and dependencies. In Ukraine, “Europe’s era is over”, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cynically assessed. At the same time, Donald Trump’s contemptuous foreign policy plays an accelerating role for the EU’s long-awaited strategic autonomy. The narrative is rapidly changing and the Commission’s first initiatives are promising, but the EU needs not only competitiveness but also political ambition. New ‘coalitions of the willing’ are emerging in Europe across old borders such as Brexit-related divisions or rivalries between the EU and NATO, reviving the concept of ‘concentric circles’. They might provide Europe with much needed impulse, but also enhance divisions and internal quarrels, which is in Trump’s strategy. Trump.2 also accelerates the ‘de-Westernisation’ of the world and leaves Europe alone versus ‘the Rest’. With EU’s more assertive stance and strategic quantum leap, it might also question and jeopardize Europe’s original peace project.
Topic:: European Union, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, Donald Trump, and Inauguration
Political Geography:: Europe and United States of America

42. Navigating neutrality: How to find the best match between NATO and its four remaining neutral Western European Partners (WEP4)?

Author:: Loïc Simonet
Publication Date:: 05-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: “Is small still beautiful?” (Gebhard, 2013). Is NATO still interested in the remaining four neutral countries in Europe (Austria, Ireland, Malta and Switzerland)? Can these WEP4 benefit from the Alliance’s ‘return to Europe’ in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine? On the opposite, might the Alliance’s ‘war’ approach, with high focus on defence and deterrence, risk marginalizing them and evidencing “the limits of partnership for deterrence” (Aronsson & Swaney, 2022, 5)? Using the opportunity of the current geopolitical crisis as well as rapidly shifting alliance constellations, this paper aims to assess the current partnership between NATO and the WEP4 and to provide with a framework for its redefinition in light of the new security context in Europe. While keeping Trump.2 ‘after-shock’, the current turmoil of the new Transatlantic relation as well as NATO’s existential crisis on the way to its summit in The Hague in June 2025, as a background, this paper tries to isolate the question of the WEP4 from the ‘elephant in the room’ and to address it as a per se challenge.
Topic:: NATO, Deterrence, Transatlantic Relations, and Neutrality
Political Geography:: Europe

43. From Belgrade to Tbilisi: How the EU Views Civil Protests

Author:: Ljiljana Kolarski
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: From Belgrade to Tbilisi: How the EU Views Civil Protests The European Union (EU) has long positioned itself as a promoter of democratic values, human rights, and media freedom. However, its stance on opposition protests in different countries is often influenced by a complex interplay of geopolitical considerations and pragmatic interests. This paper examines the EU’s contrasting reactions to anti-government protests in Serbia and Georgia in 2024, emphasizing how these responses are shaped by the political alignments of the respective governments. On the one hand, the EU has brought a strong support to opposition in Georgia, whose government maintains close ties with its northern neighbor, Russia. On the other hand, Brussels has failed to actively support opposition groups in Serbia, which has visibly distanced itself from Moscow since the war began without moving towards greater democratization.
Topic:: European Union, Democracy, Protests, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:: Europe, Serbia, and Georgia

44. France – U.S. Relationship under Trump 2.0: No Big Drama or Turbo-Charged Confrontation?

Author:: Loïc Simonet
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: In 2018, to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the end of the first World War, Emmanuel Macron, the French President, gifted Donald Trump with a young oak tree from Belleau Wood, where 1,800 American soldiers lost their lives during the first World War. The tree soon died. Macron insisted that no analogies to the Franco-American relationship should be drawn, stating, “It’s no big drama, the symbol was to plant it together.” (RFI, 2019). From Lafayette to Tocqueville, from General de Gaulle to Dominique de Villepin, France and the United States are linked by a long history that goes to the heart of their universalist values. But the relationship has not always been simple; rather “a rich drama with many chapters” (Lightfoot & Bel, 2020, 4). France’s dilemma in 2017 was: “Is Trump a revolutionary actor or a noisy status quo president?” (Lightfoot, 2018, 7). Seven years later, the answer remains uncertain. Unlike many EU members and NATO allies, France views Trump’s foreign policy with a certain détachement and regards it as ‘business as usual’—just as it already felt relatively comfortable with Trump’s America in 2017 (Zajac, 2018), On the morning of 6 November 2024, French President Emmanuel Macron was one of the first world leaders to congratulate the president-elect. The Washington Post’s columnist David Ignatius says he found a “surprising mood of acceptance” in Paris. Joe Biden’s presidency has certainly not been the ‘oasis’ of transatlantic harmony that many naively predicted, between the abrupt and uncoordinated U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, the AUKUS humiliation and the Inflation Reduction Act. This might also explain why Benjamin Haddad, France’s Deputy Minister for European Affairs, pragmatically assessed: “We worked with the first Trump administration, and we will work with the second. (…) You have to be emotionally neutral about what’s out of your control” (quoted by Ignatius, 2024). To paraphrase a recent Policy Paper of the Notre Europe Foundation, for France, it is not about the Good (Democrats) or the Bad (Republicans), but just the Ugly (Bertolini & Fabry, 2024). Having said that, Trump’s foreign policy views could hardly be more at odds with France’s current 'global agenda', which emphasizes accelerated green transition, environmental protection initiatives, global finance regulation, and multilateral governance revitalization (Tenenbaum, 2024, 13). Most of these divergences are likely to be turbo-charged during Trump’s second mandate. An opinion poll on 7 November 2024 on “The French and the election of Donald Trump” showed that 62% of French people are worried, with only 12% satisfied. 8 out of 10 French people have a poor image of Donald Trump, including the voters of the far-right Rassemblement National (56%). In both domestic and foreign policy, 85% of French people expect Donald Trump to lead a policy of rupture. 48% of French people think that with the election of Donald Trump, relations between the United States and France will deteriorate, and 44% that they will not change. Only 7% expect relations between the two countries to improve (ELABE, 2024). France, which might well be considered the least ‘Atlanticist’ country in the transatlantic community, with its NATO-skeptic past and its aspiration to European strategic autonomy, has a vested interest in an understanding with Washington. What will it make out of Trump’s victory? A lot will depend on the relationship forged between the two presidents during Trump’s first mandate, since French and American leaders have a long history of using personal diplomacy to reach agreement on divisive issues.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, NATO, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:: Europe, France, North America, and United States of America

45. NATO in 2025 and Beyond: Success and Peril Go Hand in Hand

Author:: Emiliano Alessandri
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: Against the backdrop of an impressive string of achievements, including the recent enlargements to Finland and Sweden, NATO is poised to remain the dominant force in the post-Russian invasion European security landscape. Indeed, NATO’s self-styled description as “the most successful alliance in history” has never seemed more apt. (Stoltenberg, 2024). Yet questions and doubts about NATO’s future are to resurface in 2025, possibly forcefully so: how will the Alliance cope with the return of NATO skeptic Donald Trump to the White House? And will Europe be able to meaningfully step in to compensate for a less Atlantic-oriented America? As the rise of populist nationalism is a key factor behind both America’s returning temptation to go it alone (McConnell, Foreign Affairs, 2025) and the inclination of a growing number of European politicians to define strategic policy in narrow national terms, a crucial test for the coming years is to what extent a shared vision of Euro-Atlantic security is still possible – and what it would look like. The roles and agendas of both NATO and the European Union in the evolving political context remain open questions.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, NATO, Nationalism, Regional Security, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Europe, Finland, and Sweden

46. The European Union and the Sahel: the day after

Author:: Angela Meyer, Loïc Simonet, and Johannes Späth
Publication Date:: 01-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:: Geopolitics are changing fast in the Sahel. Over the past three years, the region, one of the most impoverished and imperilled of the world, has undergone a dramatic cycle of regime change and alliance shift, which has significantly challenged the strategy and engagement of the European Union (EU) and its member states in the region. Against the background of this severe crisis in EU-Africa relations and growing anti-Western sentiments, new international players are appearing or increasing their influence, such as the Russian Federation, China and Turkey. It is now urgent for the EU to acknowledge the new situation in the Sahel region and rethink its approach. If Europe wants to remain engaged in the region, it should forge a new path guided by day-after policies, with a view to rebuilding trust in the EU as a reliable partner. This Policy Analysis draws on the Panel Discussion held at the oiip on 28 November 2024 on the same topic, in cooperation with the Austrian Federal Ministry of Defence (bmlv). This piece dives into the drivers of the Sahel region’s geopolitical dynamics and critically investigates the shortcomings of the EU’s approach to the region. It concludes with actionable recommendations for recalibrating the EU’s Sahel policy to address past mistakes, prevent further damage, and adapt to the region’s evolving realities.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, European Union, Partnerships, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:: Africa, Europe, and Sahel

47. Harvard Project Releases Second Discussion Brief on Climate-Change and Trade Policy

Author:: Valerie J. Karplus
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:: Valerie Karplus explores relationships between trade and climate-change policy, with a geographical focus on China, the United States, and Europe. She asks how, “[a]gainst a backdrop of escalating trade tensions and signs of softening climate ambition…we can make progress — or at least minimize backsliding” on climate action. She responds by citing the need for “safe spaces”: “…in trade: could certain key inputs to the green economy be potentially exempted from tariffs, without thwarting the ambitions of protectionist programs?” “…for the emergence and diffusion of decarbonized energy technologies” “…that support infrastructure and systems necessary for decarbonization.” Karplus concludes by “…offering a few ways these safe spaces might be established.”
Topic:: International Relations, Climate Change, Environment, Renewable Energy, Trade Policy, Energy, and Green Industry
Political Geography:: Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific

48. Decolonisation in the second space age

Author:: Trine Rosengren Pejstrup and Ian Klinke
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:: The corporate space race is rendering space increasingly 'congested, contested, and competitive'.1 Governments too are upgrading their space capabilities. In Denmark, the new Danish Space Strategy promises a doubling of investment to ensure a Danish space industry that is 'ready for battle'. However, concerns over the environmental and sociopolitical consequences of test launches, extensive satellite programmes and ambitions to establish bases on celestial bodies have sparked growing criticism of a 'colonisation of outer space'. This policy brief reveals a growing political rift over the question of space colonisation.
Topic:: Space, Decolonization, Investment, and Commercialization
Political Geography:: Europe, Denmark, and Space

49. Russian military thinking about the Baltic Sea and the Arctic

Author:: Flemming Splidsboel Hansen
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:: Russia is likely to continue its military build-up in both the Baltic Sea and the Arctic in the long-term perspective. Following the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO, Russian military thinkers and planners are increasingly seeing the two theatres as contiguous areas.
Topic:: Security, NATO, Military, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, Eurasia, Finland, Sweden, Arctic, and Baltic Sea

50. Baltic States’ synchronization with the continental grid

Author:: Veronika Slakaityte and Izabela Surwillo
Publication Date:: 02-2025
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:: The disconnection of the Baltic States from the Russian electricity system and their synchronisation with the Continental European Network is a key technological and geopolitical milestone. But safeguarding energy infrastructure remains vital. Operating within a shared electricity grid across multiple countries improves reliability. This arrangement allows transmission system operators (TSOs) to share resources, maintain a steady flow of electricity and handle mismatches between supply and demand more efficiently, helping to lower overall costs and ultimately benefiting consumers. However, geopolitical tensions have turned the Russian electricity system into a strategic paradox: the Baltic States, NATO and EU members are connected to Russia’s electricity dispatch system – a perceived security threat – for grid stability.
Topic:: Foreign Policy, NATO, Infrastructure, European Union, Geopolitics, Economy, Electricity, and Energy
Political Geography:: Russia, Europe, and Baltic States

Search

Search Constraints

Search Results

Refine your search

Topic

Political Geography

Content Type

Publishing Institution

Author

Publication Year

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS