Search

Begin New Search Topic Markets Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 25 Years

1. Digital Sovereignty: For a Schuman Data Plan

Author:
Arno Pons
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
On 9 January, the European Commission launched the first cooperation and monitoring cycle for the achievement of the European Union’s digital decade by 2030. If, in the digital field, Europe faces issues of sovereignty, it is because it has left the sector open for over twenty years to the American Tech giants, who have imposed a game whose rules that have never been understood here. Either because these rules were inaccessible to the European Union (Moore and Metcalfe laws), or because we accepted that there were no rules of the game (code is law).
Topic:
Markets, Science and Technology, Infrastructure, Law, European Union, Data, European Commission, and Digital Sovereignty
Political Geography:
Europe

2. Energy investment in a time of inflation

Author:
Charles Lichfield and Joseph Webster
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
High rates of inflation across the world are forcing central banks to reluctantly tighten monetary policy despite accompanying recession risks. Moreover, restricted credit access could jeopardize energy investments, particularly for capital-intensive clean energy projects, potentially rendering the world more vulnera­ble energy to price shocks, which are a significant contributor to the current crisis. This paper briefly considers the macroeconomic drivers of inflation in late 2022, including Russia’s war in Ukraine and uncertainties around energy supply, supply-chain resets, and lingering COVID-19 disruptions, before examining the persistent energy underinvestment of the past decade and how this has left markets exposed to varying degrees. As such, this paper also considers how private capital can accelerate cleaner energy adoption, suited to different markets’ unique conditions and needs. Bor­rowing costs will rise, but this doesn’t have to bring the transition to a standstill. With the Great Moderation of low volatility, interest rates, and inflation perhaps a relic of the past, assets offering inflation protection, such as infrastructure, may become increas­ingly attractive to investors. There is a fear that global inflation will sharply curtail energy investment into emerging markets. The fear is justified. Higher interest rates in developed markets mean higher rates of return which will lure emerging markets investors back to the US and Europe. Still, it’s not all bad news for emerging markets. Quasi-state actors like Pension and Sovereign Welfare funds are interested in very long term, high-yield projects—two criteria to which emerging market energy infrastructure correspond. Disruptions to interest rates and inflation, triggered in part by energy underinvestment, will cause disparate impacts in different markets. Inflation is not, perhaps, everywhere and always a mone­tary phenomenon. Energy investment faltered from 2014 to 2020, despite low interest rates. Meanwhile, aggre­gate supply shocks—first due to COVID, then from Putin’s invasion of Ukraine—have pressured energy production and prices, raising inflation and necessitating interest rate hikes. The consequences of persistent energy underinvest­ment are now becoming apparent. The need for new energy infrastructure cannot be met without private investment. This was the case when infla­tion was lower; it is even more important now.
Topic:
Environment, Markets, Oil, Governance, Gas, Economy, Investment, Inflation, and Energy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Building Resilience? The Cybersecurity, Economic & Trade Impacts of Cloud Immunity Requirements

Author:
Matthias Bauer
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
EU Member States should call on the EU’s Cybersecurity Agency (ENISA) and the European Commission to abandon immunity requirements in the proposed EU Cloud Certification Scheme (EUCS). With immunity requirements in the EUCS, the EU risks opening a Pandora’s box, paving the way for data localisation, foreign ownership restrictions, and local establishment requirements in digital industries globally leading to rising trade tensions. ENISA’s current proposal could increase policymakers’ appetite for data localisation in the EU. It would empower the European Commission and Member State authorities to exclude foreign businesses from domestic cloud services markets and set a dangerous precedent for any data-intensive sector. The list of “sectors of high criticality” could be logically extended to both existing services (e.g., financial services) and to new technologies and business models, such as IoT in the energy and healthcare sectors, and autonomous driving in the transport sector. Non-EU jurisdictions would be pressured to respond in kind. EUCS immunity requirements would increase cloud adopters’ exposure to cybersecurity risks. Data localisation often creates obstacles to an integrated management approach towards cybersecurity risks. Country of headquarter and foreign ownership restrictions in the proposed EUCS risk removing global frontier cybersecurity technologies from Member State markets. Excluding these and other EU and non-EU companies from EU Member States could result in a long-lasting security deficit of EU cloud adopters vis-à-vis organisations that are still able to use reliable and often best-practice cloud services offered by providers from outside EU Member States. Immunity requirements in the EUCS are discriminatory by design. They could provoke retaliatory measures by EU trading partners, either unilaterally or through WTO or bilateral FTA (e.g., UK-EU) Dispute Settlement. Local establishment requirements and foreign ownership restrictions would by design discriminate against foreign cloud providers. US-headquartered companies, which currently serve more than 75% of the EU market, would be most affected by EU immunity requirements.[1] Depending on US preferences and the scope of the proposed EUCS, the EU could be subject to retaliatory tariffs of up to USD 12 billion worth of EU goods exports or equivalent restrictions for EU services exports to the US. Other governments could lodge complaints via the WTO as well (e.g., Singapore, Japan, Canada and others, where cloud development is advancing rapidly). EU suppliers are currently in no position to manage a broad-based transition to cloud, and thus such requirements would delay significant efficiency and security gains that current foreign suppliers could offer. A blanket exclusion of non-EU cloud vendors would also likely undermine Europe’s objective to achieve a 75% cloud adoption rate for EU enterprises. Sensitive European businesses and public sector organisations would have to delay migration and make do with legacy systems for a very long time. Contrary to large countries, these negative impacts would be much more pronounced for smaller EU Member States, which lack the presence of large domestic incumbents and generally rely much more on an open international trading regime for digital services. ENISA’s cloud certification scheme should be limited to technical and transparency requirements. Immunity requirements for non-personal data should be addressed in bilateral initiatives such as the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC) or agreements requiring a company that sought to offer services of the highest level of sensitivity to be headquartered in a country granted adequacy with EU data protection rules, or a country that is an adherent to the OECD’s Trusted Government Access principles, or (concerning the US) a participant in the upcoming Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework. Excluding foreign companies from operating in the EU would have far-reaching consequences. If that is the intent, it should require a sound legal analysis and the decision should be taken through a formal legislative procedure at the EU level.
Topic:
Economics, Markets, European Union, Cybersecurity, Digital Economy, Trade, and Resilience
Political Geography:
Europe

4. How best to ensure international digital competition cooperation

Author:
Christophe Carugati
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Large digital firms pose similar competition issues worldwide, such as promoting their own services over those of rivals, or imposing unfair terms and conditions. Competition authorities have opened several antitrust investigations and policymakers have proposed digital competition regulations to tackle these issues. G7 competition authorities have called for several years for international cooperation on digital markets. They want competition cases and laws around the world that are consistent and work together. However, the question of how this can be done remains. A toolbox for international cooperation in competition enforcement already exists, but it does not provide for cooperation in competition policy and has shortcomings in relation to competition enforcement. Current and proposed legislation targets the largest digital firms to tackle the characteristics of digital markets, such as multi-sidedness, and the same or very similar behaviours, such as self-preferencing. Legislation in different jurisdictions addresses these issues with similar rules. While there is some convergence, some rules diverge in substance and some are at high risk of divergence in interpretation. Inconsistency is thus likely to arise from a divergence of interpretation rather than substance. The solution would be to ensure a coherent approach to competition in digital markets. This could be done by developing a framework based on four elements: (1) adoption of common legal phases for future digital competition laws to ensure clarity; (2) adoption of a common legal interpretation through guidance drafted by international forums, such as the International Competition Network (ICN); (3) adoption of common technical requirements developed in the context of ICN technical workshops, when the rules require it; and (4) the implementation of an international monitoring committee within the ICN to evaluate whether competition authorities and courts enforce the rules consistently. The impact of the framework might be limited because of the non-binding nature of the approach, and the focus on specific competition-related legislation, excluding laws that can also address the issues, such as civil law. Countries can overcome these limitations if they are willing to cooperate to ensure a consistent approach.
Topic:
Markets, Digital Economy, Digital Cooperation, and Competition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Rational Eviction: How Landlords Use Evictions in Response to Rent Control

Author:
Eilidh Geddes and Nicole Holz
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
As housing prices rise, cities are turning to rent control policies, hoping to ensure longterm affordable housing. Typically, rent control policies require leases to be renewed at statutorily limited rent increases. Rent control policies reduce the returns from operating in the rental market, creating well‐​studied incentives for landlords to leave the rental market. Many rent control policies—including San Francisco’s—feature vacancy decontrol provisions, which allow landlords to reset rents to market rates when tenants move. These policies limit the reductions in returns to operating in the rental market but create incentives for landlords to induce tenant turnover, possibly through evictions. The more tenants move, the more often a landlord can raise rents to market rates.
Topic:
Markets, Economy, Eviction, Housing, and Rent
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Green Hydrogen Industrial Value Chains: Geopolitical and Market Implications

Author:
Nicola De Blasio and Laima Eicke
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The global transition to a low-carbon economy and adopting the needed clean energy technologies at scale will significantly impact existing value chains1 and transform production-to-consumption lifecycles. Regulatory and business models will need to rapidly evolve to manage the resulting substantial cost challenges and dramatic shifts in stakeholder interactions while continuing to create value. Green hydrogen2 is likely to play a pivotal role in a carbon-free future, as its adoption will enable the decarbonization of energy-intensive industrial processes whose emissions are hard to abate through simple electrification—such as steel and cement production. However, to take advantage of the economic opportunities created by its adoption at scale, countries will need to rethink the roles they could play in a new energy landscape and define strategic industrial policies accordingly. Our research3 shows how successful industrial policies must reflect a country’s potential value chain positioning in future green hydrogen markets and elucidates macro geopolitical trends that could reshape international relations as countries compete for industrial leadership, market shares, and opportunities for job creation.
Topic:
Markets, Economy, Carbon Emissions, Value Chains, Hydrogen, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Exchange Rate Predictability Based on Market Sentiments

Author:
Hyo Sang Kim, Eunjung Kang, Yuri Kim, Seongman Moon, and Huisu Jang
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
It is well-known that exchange rates are difficult to forecast using observed macro-fundamental variables. This discrepancy between economic theory and empirical results is called the Meese and Rogoff puzzle. The purpose of this study is to address this puzzle from a new approach. Rather than pursuing a linkage between macro-fundamentals and exchange rates, we focus on the market sentiment index as a factor that could possibly enhance exchange rate predictability. The analysis folds into three phases. First, we conducted an assessment of the traditional exchange rate predictability model, as well as the augmented traditional model incorporating the market sentiment index. Second, we predicted the exchange rate by applying the market sentiment index, based on the contrarian opinion investment strategy commonly used by foreign exchange dealers. Finally, we analyzed if the machine learning model incorporating both economic fundamentals and market sentiment index could enhance the predictability of the exchange rate.
Topic:
Economics, Markets, and Exchange Rates
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. The European Union renews its offensive against US technology firms

Author:
Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Megan Hogan
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The European Union's proposed Digital Markets Act (DMA) contemplates extensive regulation of "gatekeeper" digital platforms—firms that perform a "core platform service" in the European Union (defined as online intermediation, online search, social networking, video sharing, electronic communication, cloud services, or online advertising), have a significant impact on the EU internal market, serve as an important gateway between business users and end-users, and enjoy an entrenched and durable position. Although at least one European firm could qualify as a gatekeeper, Hufbauer and Hogan say, the DMA discriminates against American technology firms by singling them out for the label of "gatekeepers." The European Commission’s proposed DMA targets both US tech giants such as Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Microsoft and smaller (albeit huge) US tech firms such as Airbnb and PayPal. The authors say the EU goal is to confer competitive advantage on European digital firms, breaching the EU commitment to national treatment of foreign firms, violating their intellectual property rights, and imposing high expenses on the "gatekeepers." At the same time, France is planning to enact its own steep barriers against US and other foreign cloud services.
Topic:
Markets, Science and Technology, European Union, Economy, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

9. Slippery Fish: Enforcing Regulation under Subversive Adaptation

Author:
Andres Gonzalez-Lira
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Correcting market failures and improving economic efficiency often require curbing undesirable behaviors of market agents who act to maximize their private benefits. Examples include actions that affect ecosystems, such as deforestation, pollution, and overexploitation of natural resources; actions that affect community health, such as drunk driving and open defecation; or actions that undermine government performance, such as corruption and tax evasion. Enacting and enforcing regulations is the most direct strategy to deter such behaviors. Implementing this strategy requires strong institutions to enforce laws, plus sophisticated policing to track agents’ reactions to enforcement so that rules are robust enough to curb the undesirable behavior even when regulated agents try to game the new system.
Topic:
Environment, Government, Markets, Regulation, and Adaptation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. The Regulatory Costs of Being Public

Author:
Michael Ewens, Kairong Xiao, and Ting Xu
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
An important explanation for the significant decline in the number of publicly listed companies in the United States is the increased burden of disclosure and governance regulations. Indeed, practitioners often point to heightened regulatory costs as the culprit of the disappearing public firms, while major deregulations such as the 2012 Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act were directly motivated by perceived costs of being public. Thus, understanding the role of regulations in the cost of being public and the decline in the number of public firms can address concerns about possible capital market dysfunction.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Regulation, and Business
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

11. Economic Security in Emerging Markets: A Look at India, Vietnam, and Indonesia

Author:
Matthew Goodman, Matthew Reynolds, and Julianne Fittipaldi
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
With the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, supply chain resilience has emerged as a policy priority of the United States and its allies. The issue of supply chains has also raised the profile of emerging economies that offer possible alternatives to China as production platforms for multinational firms. This report surveys economic security policy developments in three major emerging economies: India, Vietnam, and Indonesia. It finds that all are attempting to take advantage of this new focus on supply chain resilience, while (to varying degrees) balancing the economic security risks posed by China’s rise. The United States and its allies have an opportunity to work with these emerging economies to shape their decisions about trade, investment, and technology policies in ways that promote mutual economic security and enhance international economic rules and norms.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Emerging Markets, International Trade and Finance, and Markets
Political Geography:
Indonesia, India, Asia, Vietnam, and Asia-Pacific

12. Boom-bust Cycles Revisited: The Role of Credit Supply

Author:
Hyo Sang Kim, Sangyup Choi, and Yuri Kim
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study investigates the impacts of credit supply on economic growth and financial crisis. Excess credit supply can make the economy and financial markets more vulnerable. While credit supply can drive economic growth by reallocating resources, it can also make the economy and financial markets more fragile. Asset prices sharply fall when deleveraging occurs in the case of a negative shock to the financial or real sector in a system where credit is excessively supplied. Furthermore, economic activity might be substantially reduced, extending the length and breadth of the recession.
Topic:
Markets, Financial Crisis, Economy, Economic Growth, and Credit
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Securing alternative gas supplies and addressing critical infrastructure gaps in Europe

Author:
Richard L. Morningstar, András Simonyi, Olga Khakova, and Paddy Ryan
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The Kremlin’s weaponization of natural gas exports to Europe as winter approaches has shattered any illusions that Russia could be a reliable supplier. Europe urgently needs to import gas from other suppliers to heat its homes and power its industry. In doing so, Europe can build a more secure and sustainable energy system while cutting off funds for Moscow’s war machine. Painfully high energy prices are already having a serious impact on quality of life and economic development in Europe. New natural gas supplies and expanded interconnections to bring them to market will drive down the costs of energy and reduce the likelihood of social unrest over energy poverty. The surest means to end Russia’s energy leverage over Europe include accelerating the green transformation, curtailing gas demand, and boosting energy efficiency. However, the continent cannot implement these changes overnight. Gas remains instrumental in Europe’s transition from dirtier fossil fuels, electrification of power-hungry sectors, and integration of large-scale intermittent renewables. Natural gas will likely remain a critical part of Europe’s power baseload for at least the medium term. Procuring an adequate supply of gas in the short to midterm is not at odds with the energy transition. Europe must cultivate alternative suppliers, build non-Russian-oriented import infrastructure, and accelerate decarbonization in tandem to boost energy security and affordability. Sourcing gas from non-Russian suppliers will sustain longer-term decarbonization efforts and prevent regression back to dirtier fuels amid the energy crunch. To diversify their energy systems, European states must determine how much Russian gas can be replaced and from where, as well as what new infrastructure will be necessary to enable new imports. The European Union (EU) needs to clearly articulate the anticipated natural gas supply gap to identify investment opportunities for the relevant market players. This issue brief examines potential sources of alternative gas supplies, the infrastructure required to bring new supplies to European consumers, and the financial and regulatory mechanisms needed to support diversification efforts. It offers recommendations for measures that European countries decoupling their energy supplies from Russia should take to give themselves the best chances of succeeding.
Topic:
Environment, Markets, Oil, Gas, Energy, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
Europe

14. The Impacts of EU Strategy Autonomy Policies – A Primer for Member States

Author:
Matthias Bauer
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
EU governments should be much more sceptical and critical of the EU’s strategic autonomy agenda and the new polices intended to achieve the EU’s “long-term” industrial and technological ambitions. The long-term costs for Member States’ economies and the process of economic convergence are largely ignored by the agenda. Negative impacts of strategic autonomy on trade openness and the international rules-based trading system are also greatly understated. Many EU strategic autonomy ambitions are inherently guided by a “European Union First” impulse. Policymakers follow the assumption that EU values are superior to those in other parts of the world and EU regulation should be different from third countries. Major strategic autonomy aspirations represent a relapse of the EU to the old policy of EU member states designing and enforcing their own laws without considering the economic and political costs of regulatory fragmentation and economic disintegration from others. Recent strategic autonomy policies are estimated to create income losses in the EU of between 0.08% and 0.15% of EU27 GDP. These losses correspond to short-term economic harm resulting from changes in the use of productive resources in the EU. Long-run impacts, which reflect losses to productivity and innovation, could be up to 3 to 5 times higher with national income per capita falling by up to 0.5% to 0.75%. The costs are not evenly distributed across the EU27. Larger countries like France and Germany are less impacted than smaller ones, notably Ireland and the Baltic states. The impacts on Ireland, for example, are close to 4 times bigger than they are for France, the impacts on Estonia close to twice those on Germany. Strategic autonomy ambitions have failed to account for negative impacts on developing countries. To the extent that the EU’s policy stance further fragilizes rules-based multilateralism, there are longer-term impacts stemming from a less certain legal environment and higher barriers for cross-border trade and investment. EU strategic autonomy policies have the effect of empowering vested interests in developing countries to engage in lobbying for their own protectionist policies. Accordingly, EU strategic autonomy policies risk encouraging the diffusion of protectionist policies globally, particularly in countries with weak institutional capacity. EU Member States should examine their options and ask themselves whether there are better long-term strategies to pursue than those currently proposed at the EU level, strategies guided by the spirit of an open society – a society embracing the principles of free trade, non-discrimination, and economic freedom. Europe’s policymakers should aim for closer market integration and regulatory cooperation with trustworthy international partners such as the G7 and the larger group of the OECD countries. It is in the EU’s self-interest to advocate for a rules-based international order with open markets. It is neither in the EU’s economic nor its political interest to disintegrate from partner countries.
Topic:
Markets, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Trade, and Strategic Autonomy
Political Geography:
Europe

15. Don’t look only to Brussels to increase the supply of safe assets in the European Union

Author:
Francesco Papadia and Heliodoro Temprano Arroyo
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
A sufficient supply of safe assets denominated in euros is critical if the European Union is to achieve full banking and capital markets union while fostering the euro’s international role. The European debate on developing the supply of safe assets has so far focused on the possible creation of a common safe asset. This has tended to underplay the potential contribution of sovereign assets. Expanding the supply of national safe assets, notably through the gradual implementation of fiscal and growth-oriented structural policies in euro-area countries, leading to upgrading of their sovereign ratings, provides a promising, and perhaps more feasible, option. An upgrade to triple A of those euro-area countries that are currently rated double A could produce substantially more safe assets than most common safe asset proposals, including those based on the development of ‘synthetic’ safe assets. There has been a remarkable increase in the share of supranational assets in the stock of euro-based safe assets since 2008, reflecting downgrades in sovereign ratings and the EU’s financial responses to the euro-area crisis and the pandemic. However, safe assets in euro remain dominated by those issued by euro-area governments. Although common safe assets have certain advantages over national safe assets, reflecting their built-in risk diversification properties, there is currently not much political appetite for such proposals. Meanwhile, sovereign safe assets already offer many of the advantages of common safe assets. Sound fiscal policies and growth-stimulating reforms, which are in any case desirable, should be implemented to improve the credit ratings of euro-area sovereigns. This might not be politically feasible in the short-term, given the difficult economic environment currently faced by the EU, but it should be a key component of the EU’s medium-term safe asset strategy. Should the political consensus be found to create a common safe asset, such an asset could be incorporated into the euro area’s existing safe asset system, reinforcing its positive effects.
Topic:
Debt, Markets, Monetary Policy, European Union, Regional Integration, European Monetary Union, and Banking
Political Geography:
Europe

16. An assessment of Europe’s options for addressing the crisis in energy markets

Author:
Conall Heussaff, Simone Tagliapietra, Georg Zachmann, and Jeromin Zettelmeyer
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, wholesale prices for electricity and gas in the European Union have risen five to fifteen-fold, with severe impacts for households and businesses. The crisis is also creating liquidity problems for energy companies, with contagion risks for the financial sector. In response, European governments have taken a range of actions. Some have introduced measures at retail level, while others have introduced windfall-profit taxes on energy companies. Some countries have provided emergency liquidity to energy companies facing soaring collateral costs. Some energy companies have even been nationalised. Emergency-intervention proposals should be evaluated against three principles. First, energy supply must meet demand at prices that do not cause major damage to the European economy. Second, the most vulnerable consumers must be protected. Third, measures should be consistent with the case for investment in a sustainable energy system, in order to safeguard Europe’s ability to decouple structurally from fossil-fuel imports. Gas price caps have been proposed as an emergency measure in different forms: a cap on Russian gas only, a cap on gas used in electricity generation, a cap on all wholesale gas. All entail significant risks. The first might lead to a full stop of Russian gas into the EU. The second might increase gas demand from the electricity sector. The third might raise gas demand and also undermine Europe’s ability to attract much-needed gas supplies. Instead of capping gas prices, the EU should engage collectively with external gas suppliers and negotiate new long-term contracts with provisions to limit price volatility. A September 2022 European Commission proposal involving electricity demand reduction, a revenue cap on inframarginal generation, solidarity payments from fossil-fuel companies and consumer support measures, is broadly positive, notably because it emphasises demand reduction. However, it is not sufficient. A more comprehensive plan needs to ensure that all countries bring forward every available supply-side flexibility, make real efforts to reduce gas and electricity demand, keep their energy markets open and pool demand to get a better deal from external gas suppliers. In the longer term, measures to split the markets for energy generated from renewables and fossil fuels should be examined.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Energy Sector, and Green Economy
Political Geography:
Europe

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

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

18. Australia’s semiconductor national moonshot

Author:
Alex Capri and Robert Clark
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
Australia has recently been forced to cross a Rubicon. Its wholehearted embrace of global free trade and just-in-time supply chains has had to confront the hard reality of geopolitics. In many parts of the world, geopolitics is choking free trade, and China—Australia’s largest trading partner—has shown itself particularly willing to use trade coercively and abrogate its free trade commitments, not just with Australia, but with countries all around the world. Advanced technologies are at the centre of this geopolitical struggle, because of the risk that withheld supply poses to national economies and security. As Covid-19 disruptions have demonstrated, the risks are not even limited to deliberate coercion. In this environment, bold action is warranted. Continuing to do what we did before is not an option because it will undermine the national interest. A new approach is needed that’s in part heretical to our old market-based approach but is driven by necessity: government intervention that works in tandem with industry expertise and drive. In this important policy brief, Alex Capri and Robert Clark lay out a vision for Australia to secure its place in the global semiconductor industry—an industry they describe as ‘the single most important technology underlying leading-edge industries’. Their proposal is to stimulate A$5 billion of semiconductor manufacturing activity through A$1.5 billion of government investment and financial incentives. Those subsidies and tax concessions would mirror similar initiatives such as the US ‘CHIPS’ and ‘FABS’ Acts, but are focused on Australia’s interests. They identify a logical niche for Australia that would initially establish a distributed commercial compound semiconductor foundry capability across Australia via a public–private partnership. In the longer term, they propose establishing a commercial silicon complementary metal-oxide semiconductor foundry at mature process scale. Government intervention in a market shouldn’t be made lightly, but Capri and Clark make a compelling case to do so. If policymakers agree that Australia needs access to semiconductors and that their supply from elsewhere can’t be guaranteed, then intervention is imperative. This policy brief lays out a ‘moonshot’ to get Australia there.
Topic:
Markets, Trade, Supply Chains, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
Australia and Australia/Pacific

19. The Price Cap on Russian Oil Exports, Explained

Author:
Catherine Wolfram, Simon Johnson, and Łukasz Rachel
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
If you’ve taken an introductory economics class, you were probably left with the strong impression that price caps are bad – they distort demand and discourage producers from supplying the market. So, why has Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, the consummate economist, advocated so strongly for a price cap on Russian oil? The answer is that this price cap is different from the standard cap discussed in introductory economics classes. A standard price cap applies to all goods traded in a market. For example, in some countries there are price caps on bread for everyone or diesel for farmers or rent controls on housing. Such caps lead to excess demand for the good and insufficient supply, leading to shortages at the capped price. If prices are constrained, other non-price mechanisms, like first-come-first-served, are required to allocate the good. All too frequently, the result is empty bakery shelves or fuel shortages or difficulties finding housing. To understand why the cap on Russian oil is different, we first need to provide background on Russian oil trade and the proposed price cap.
Topic:
Economics, Markets, Oil, Exports, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

20. RCEP Is Not Enough: South Korea Also Needs to Join the CPTPP

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The benefits of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) for South Korea are limited and need to be supplemented by more comprehensive agreements that deepen Korea’s ties to strategic allies in the Asia-Pacific region. RCEP's most important achievement is its new regional content rule that will encourage deeper integration of supply chains across the 15 markets, a key benefit for Korean industries invested in the region. But Schott notes that the pact also has significant limitations. To complement RCEP, he recommends that South Korea move forward with two other trade negotiating priorities, membership in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and upgrading the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement (KORUS), the latter aimed at encouraging US reengagement in the Asia-Pacific integration pact.
Topic:
Markets, Treaties and Agreements, Partnerships, Regional Integration, and Economic Policy
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea