Search

Begin New Search Publication Year within 1 Year Publication Year within 25 Years

2901. Can official development assistance be saved? The general reduction in funding means that we need to redefine our objectives

Author:
Louis Caudron
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
Official development assistance (ODA) is in trouble. It is in crisis. In the United States, Donald Trump decided, one month after returning to the White House, to abolish the USAID programme, which managed US ODA amounting to $64 billion in 2023. While the European Union and its Member States remain the main providers of official development assistance worldwide, the European Commission is planning to reduce the funds allocated to the least developed countries by 35% for the period 2025-2027, compared to the period 2021-2024. There is no indication that the situation will improve in the new multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034 currently being prepared. A large proportion of these funds has been redirected to Ukraine over the past three years. Some Member States, such as the Netherlands, Germany, Belgium and Sweden, have also reduced their budgets for this aid. In France, President Emmanuel Macron, who had pledged in 2017 to increase it to 0.55% of GDP, has allowed his budget to be cut by a third in 2025. More than forty years ago, all countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) committed to devoting 0.7% of their GDP to official development assistance. At the time, this was seen as a duty of solidarity and a means of reducing the gap between developed and developing countries. Only a few countries have honoured the 0.7% of GDP commitment, but donors were at least trying to maintain their aid. Recent cuts show that they no longer believe in it. The most worrying thing is that these cuts in funding are hardly provoking any response from public opinion. Perceived as a simple ‘gift’ to developing countries, official development assistance has now been relegated to second place behind new or more urgent funding priorities such as European defence, innovation and climate transition. This indifference could be fatal for official development assistance, while its abolition would seriously damage our relations with the rest of the world. This is particularly true of our relations with Africa, which are so important for our future.
Topic:
Public Opinion, OECD, Development Assistance, and Funding Cuts
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2902. The European Union and its islands as they face today's challenges

Author:
Marie-Antoinette Maupertuis
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
The European Union has several thousand islands, 2,400 of which are inhabited. Island status affects 20.5 million Europeans living in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, as well as in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans in the case of overseas territories. This does not include island Member States such as Ireland, Malta and Cyprus, or countries with hundreds of islands such as Croatia, Denmark, Greece and Sweden. Despite a wide variety of ecological, economic and institutional contexts[1], islands all share the consequences of geographical discontinuity. These unique territories are inherently subject to structural constraints recognised by the articles 174 and 349 of the TFEU, First and foremost among these are the additional transport costs and lack of accessibility that hinder the free movement of people and goods. In island economies, monopolies and oligopolies in the transport and distribution of goods and services increase production costs and the cost of living, hampering development and competitiveness. The islands[2] also suffer, all too often, from the exodus of their human capital, an ageing population and, at the same time, pressure on land and property caused by the massive seasonal influx of tourists. Furthermore, economic specialisation – a key feature of island production systems – and heavy external dependence make these small economies vulnerable to all kinds of hazards. Added to this are the threats of flooding, storms and other effects of global warming on land and at sea. Territorial discontinuity, insufficient connectivity, economic vulnerability, climate disruption: the accumulation of constraints is easy to quantify and has already been widely debated in specialist literature[3]. Just as many European tourists are getting ready to head to one of these island destinations for their summer holidays, it is important to look beyond the idyllic image that European culture has created for these places and remember that there is also an economic and geopolitical reality that EU leaders need to bear in mind in these uncertain times.
Topic:
Tourism, European Union, Geopolitics, Ecology, and Islands
Political Geography:
Europe

2903. In support of European regulation compatible with growth

Author:
Florent Menegaux
Publication Date:
12-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
“America innovates, Europe regulates": we have heard this phrase many times, revealing a fundamental difference in approach between the two continents. America undoubtedly produces economic giants, and Europe specialises in regulating them, failing to bring forth true world champions of European origin. The simplification is undoubtedly unfair, but it highlights the dangers of regulations that are designed primarily to constrain innovation and growth rather than to promote it. [1] It also illustrates a certain European propensity for self-pity. We Europeans need to recognise our strengths. The European scale is the only relevant one if we are to have economic clout against the United States and China. The single market is a major lever of power in this respect, but it is still incomplete. Fragmented national regulations are obstacles to the emergence of European champions of global standing. This is still an issue in many areas where Europe could take the lead in international competition, such as the circular economy. Regulation can therefore be a double-edged sword, depending on whether it harmonises or makes things more difficult. But it seems to have been forgotten that it should above all serve a vision. It must be recognised that the United States has made clear choices and has given itself the means to produce champions. The limitations in Europe stem largely from the lack of a clear vision like this, which automatically results in inconsistent and inefficient regulations. The current economic and geopolitical challenge must be seen as an opportunity for the European Union to bounce back, as it is forced to transform very quickly. A change of approach in the way the question of regulation in Europe is addressed will necessarily have to form part of this effort of reinvention.
Topic:
European Union, Democracy, Geopolitics, Regulation, Citizenship, and Economic Growth
Political Geography:
Europe

2904. Democratic resilience in Europe in a polarised world

Author:
Jean-Dominique Giuliani
Publication Date:
11-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
I am particularly happy to be here once more at the University of Tartu[1], which I had the honour of visiting a long time ago, back in 2003. One of the oldest universities in Europe, it plays a significant role in your country and throughout the continent in providing the very highest level of education. I even had earlier the privilege of meeting and having lunch with Lennart Meri, President of the Republic, and I have very fond memories of our conversation. I was particularly impressed by his analysis of Russia, which takes on a whole new dimension today with the return of the Russian threat. There has been a very strong relationship between Estonia and France since the founding of your Republic, which was established here in 1920 by the Treaty of Tartu. French soldiers are now fighting alongside yours in a demonstration of solidarity that has never ceased to be in our hearts. We never recognised the Soviet occupation. You should know that France has a deep attachment to Estonia, which continues to show in our fraternity every day. I mention this because the subject you have asked me to explore, which I hope will serve as a basis for our discussions, reflects a legitimate concern regarding European determination to resist Russian aggression, a concern that is heightened here, a few kilometres from Lake Peipus (in Estonian: Peipsi-Pihkva järv), which sometimes witnesses a fluctuation of its borders in the eyes of your large neighbour. I will begin with the definition of resilience, a term that comes from physics and is very fashionable in intellectual circles and in politics. Resilience is the ability to withstand a brutal ordeal and to draw strength from it.
Topic:
Democracy, Resilience, and Polarization
Political Geography:
Europe, France, and Estonia

2905. French nuclear deterrence and Europe

Author:
Bernard Rogel
Publication Date:
11-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
When the Soviet empire collapsed in the 1990s, the existential threat to our borders became a thing of the past. At the time, we did not realise that this would only be temporary in the grand scheme of history. Taking a deep breath, we entered a period known as the ‘peace dividends’, which led to strategic calm in Europe. This resulted, in our country as in the rest of Europe, in a continuous erosion of defence budgets and, de facto, a reduction in our military capabilities. Thus, until about ten years ago, short-term gains took precedence over necessary long-term caution. Today, the awakening has been somewhat brutal. In this post-Cold War context of renewed peace, the principles of national nuclear deterrence were preserved and regularly reasserted in a world that remained, despite everything, nuclear. Its existence was perpetuated to guard against any strategic surprises. However, our deterrent forces, like our conventional ones, have undergone substantial downsizing, referred to as ‘strict sufficiency’, as they have adapted to the new international context. There is no doubt that the era allowed for progress towards global disarmament, in line with the letter and spirit of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). A global movement to reduce nuclear arsenals was then undertaken. For its part, France dismantled its fissile material production facilities and its ground-to-ground component, signed the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), reduced the number of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) from six to four and the number of air squadrons from three to two, to cite just a few examples.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Deterrence
Political Geography:
Europe and France

2906. The Georgian challenge, a challenge for Europe

Author:
Salomé Zourabichvili
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
In the shadow of the Russian war in Ukraine and the debates on the possible outcomes of the conflict and the looming geopolitical realignments, Georgia seems to have fallen off the radar and been relegated to the background of Europe's priorities. Since gaining independence more than thirty years ago, the country has been forging ahead with determination and boldness on the road to European integration[1]. Since 1991, Georgia has completed all the stages: Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (1999), European Neighbourhood Policy (2004), Eastern Partnership (2009), Association and Free Trade Agreement (2014), visa liberalisation for the Schengen area (2017), inclusion of the objective of European integration in the Constitution (2018), official application for membership of the European Union (2022) and obtaining candidate status (2023). This path has been travelled without pause or reflection, and without hesitation even when Russia, by means of war (1992/1993, 2008) or occupation of parts of the territory, sought to erect obstacles to this progress. This orientation has benefited from the outset and continuously from the support of an immense majority of the population. This majority is based on the conviction of Georgian citizens that only the European and Euro-Atlantic bloc could ultimately ensure the nation's security and independence from its historical enemy. Having completed the stages of the association agreement, Georgia rose to the rank of host power of the Petra Summit (2021), thus launching the trio of Associate Members of the European Union with Ukraine and Moldova and under the auspices of the President of the European Council.
Topic:
European Union, Democracy, Geopolitics, Regional Integration, Regional Politics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Georgia

2907. The Four Challenges facing European Defence

Author:
Jean-Marc Vigilant
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
After five centuries of Western global domination, we are living in a period of geopolitical change of the same magnitude as the end of the Cold War. Because European empires nearly destroyed themselves during the two World Wars of the 20th century, they established, under the impetus of the United States, an international order to regulate relations between powers. But today, with its aggression in Ukraine, Russia has ended the longest period of peace on the European continent since the fall of the Roman Empire. Until 1945, virtually every generation of Europeans had experienced war in their own country. During the eighty years that followed – with the notable exception of the Balkan wars resulting from the break-up of Yugoslavia and the final aftershocks of the Soviet empire’s collapse after the Cold War – almost three generations of Europeans have not known war on their soil. Over the past thirty years, emerging or transitional powers have observed us and developed to the point where they are now able to challenge the international order established by the Western victors of the Second World War. We are witnessing the return of power politics and the undermining of international law, through the unrestrained use of violence to settle political disputes. Beyond the military war in Ukraine – whose aim it is to erase that country as an independent nation – Russia is attacking the very foundations of European liberal democracies, whose attractiveness to Russian people represents a threat to Vladimir Putin’s autocratic regime.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Regional Cooperation, European Union, Geopolitics, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe

2908. Europeans and Trump: dishonour, impotence or influence?

Author:
Maxime Lefebvre
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
Responses to the Turnberry trade agreement between Donald Trump and Ursula von der Leyen on 27 July (formalised in an EU-US statement published on 27 August) did not mince words: ‘shame’, ‘submission’, ‘vassalage’, ‘humiliation’, and even the beginning of a ‘century of humiliation’ for Europe, following the example of China, which was forced to open up its imports of opium in the mid-19th century, marking the beginning of the long decline of the Middle Kingdom. This agreement must be viewed in the broader context of transatlantic relations during Donald Trump's second term, which includes the situation in Ukraine and, more broadly, the issue of European defence and security. Looking at things in this context, Europeans have so far shown unity, diplomacy and even efficiency. They have begun to learn from their weaknesses, but the road to European power remains fraught with pitfalls.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

2909. Online Leisure Activity and Digital Platforms in an Open Economy

Author:
Jiheum Yeon and Xiaohan Zhang
Publication Date:
11-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Digital platforms have become central to modern economies, as consumers increasingly spend leisure time online and platform firms transform user engagement into economic value. This study develops a multi-country, multi-industry open economy general equilibrium model to analyze how web traffic—measured as visits to platform domains—can be converted into “data capital” through big data and AI algorithms and then used as a non-rival input for production and innovation. To ground the analysis, we construct a new dataset that links domain-level web traffic to corporate ownership across countries. The evidence reveals sharp cross country differences in the geographic origin of users. U.S. platforms attract a strongly international audience, with domestic users accounting for less than one-third of visits on average. Chinese platforms are more domestically concentrated, though TikTok stands out as a global exception with a highly international user base. Korean platforms, by contrast, rely overwhelmingly on domestic users, with less than ten percent of traffic originating abroad. Comparing these patterns with international service trade statistics, we find that countries with higher shares of foreign users are systematically more active in exporting online services. Qualitative analysis provides further insight into user behavior. Consumers allocate more time to a platform when they experience greater content satisfaction, which depends on both technological quality and country-specific content preferences. When the quality of foreign platform content improves, consumers reallocate time away from domestic platforms toward foreign ones. The extent of this shift is influenced by the elasticity of leisure demand, the substitutability across platforms, and the share of time already devoted to foreign platforms. The general equilibrium model allows us to simulate counterfactual scenarios and evaluate policy-relevant outcomes. Reducing cross-border frictions to foreign content raises welfare in all countries, primarily through the expansion of content variety and the reallocation of consumer time, while leaving the broader industrial structure largely unchanged. Lowering barriers faced by foreign platforms, such as discriminatory digital services taxes, increases platform revenues, encourages consumers to spend more leisure time online, and strengthens investment incentives for domestic platforms. Although the immediate welfare gains are modest, the longer-run effects on intangible investment and innovation are more significant. Enhancing the productivity of platform R&D generates asymmetric effects by expanding platform activity in the innovating country and reducing it in the non innovating country, yet global welfare increases because users everywhere benefit from improved content quality and diversity. Taken together, the findings highlight that the accumulation of web-traffic-based data capital is a central driver of platform growth. Policies that improve access to foreign content, the taxation of digital services, and foster innovation in platform R&D directly influence how consumer time is allocated and how platform firms invest in data-driven growth. For policymakers, the results suggest that lowering barriers to cross-border online activity can deliver substantial welfare gains, that digital taxation should be carefully designed to balance fiscal and innovation objectives, and that investment in platform R&D is essential for competitiveness in the global digital economy. In sum, this study demonstrates that digital platforms thrive not only on technological progress but also on the ability to accumulate and deploy data capital derived from web traffic. Recognizing the economic role of data capital is crucial for designing effective policies in the digital era, where market access, taxation, and innovation shape the international competitiveness of platform industries.
Topic:
Economy, Leisure, and Digital Platforms
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2910. Trade and Growth with Digital Data

Author:
Kyu Yub Lee
Publication Date:
11-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This paper introduces a newly developed model that examines the interplay between trade, growth, and digital data, emphasizing data’s dual role as both a driver of growth and a source of privacy concerns. Departing from existing trade and growth models that have largely overlooked digital data’s unique characteristics, this paper provides the first comprehensive analysis of how data influences growth through data flows and knowledge diffusion, while simultaneously introducing associated privacy trade-offs. A key novelty of this model lies in its clear distinction between digital data and traditional “ideas.” Both concepts share the characteristics of non-rivalry and stocklike accumulation, meaning they are cumulative and can be used by multiple entities with negligible additional cost. However, ideas are generally understood to produce only positive externalities, whereas digital data uniquely generates both positive and negative externalities simultaneously, including privacy and cybersecurity concerns for consumers. The model is built within a dynamic general equilibrium framework that incorporates international trade and endogenous technological change, extending the work of Rivera-Batiz and Romer (1991) by integrating the evolution of digital data. Consumption activities, both domestic and a portion of foreign consumption, actively contribute to a country’s evolving data stock. This generated data then acts as a negative externality in the utility function of privacy-conscious consumers, reducing their welfare, even as it serves as a primary input for the R&D sector, fueling the growth engine. Key findings from this new model highlight significant impacts: First, (economic growth) the model shows that unrestricted cross-border data flows are a significant stimulant for economic growth. This positive effect is further magnified by stronger knowledge spillovers and an increased number of trading partners. Conversely, stricter restrictions on data flows directly impede economic growth. The paper notes that trade liberalization alone, without the diffusion of ideas or data flows, only generates a level effect and does not affect long-term economic growth. Second, (trade-off with individual welfare) another central finding is the inherent trade-off between economic growth and individual welfare. While open data flows promote economic expansion, they simultaneously intensify privacy concerns, leading to a reduction in individual welfare. This conflict is particularly pronounced in scenarios with limited or inefficient knowledge diffusion. Conversely, the model indicates that stricter data regulations, while hindering growth, can enhance individual welfare by mitigating these privacy risks. To navigate the identified trade-off between growth and privacy, the paper advocates against data localization and strongly supports the implementation of deep digital trade agreements. These agreements are proposed as crucial mechanisms to facilitate freer data flows and knowledge sharing, thereby mitigating the inherent conflict and unlocking the full potential of the digital economy.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Economic Growth, and Digital Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus