Search

Begin New Search Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

81. 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

82. 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

83. 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

84. 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

85. 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

86. 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

87. Will China’s economy follow the same path as Japan’s?

Author:
Alicia Garcia-Herrero and Jianwei Xu
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Since the bursting of China’s real-estate bubble in mid-2021, there has been a growing concern that the Chinese economy could end up like that of Japan in the early 1990s. Some structural patterns are strikingly similar: low private consumption over a long period, especially when compared to the rest of the world, and an excessively high savings ratio, though China’s imbalances now are even larger that Japan’s were then. Initial policy responses to the bursting of their respective bubbles have also been similar. Both China now and Japan then were initially hesitant to ease monetary and fiscal policies, and opted to expand manufacturing, with an eye on external demand, supported by more research and development expenditure. In both cases, the outcomes were stubborn trade surpluses and a mercantilist attitude to their growth problems, leading to the United States taking protectionist measures. China also seems to be following Japan’s offshoring of production to mitigate the impact of protectionism. The main difference, though, is that China now is a poorer country than Japan was then, with still more convergence opportunities ahead. China is also a much bigger military and geopolitical contender than Japan ever was. China’s geopolitical weight is behind the US technological containment of China, but also gives China more room for manoeuvre globally, especially in the Global South. It remains unclear – though globally significant – whether China will be able to deviate from the path followed by Japan in the 1980s and 1990s.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Geopolitics, Economy, Economic Growth, Innovation, and Real Estate
Political Geography:
Japan, China, and Asia

88. 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

89. 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

90. 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

91. 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

92. 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

93. 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

94. 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

95. 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

96. 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

97. 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

98. Terrorism and Immigration: 50 Years of Foreign-Born Terrorism on US Soil, 1975–2024

Author:
Alex Nowrasteh
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Terrorism is a hazard to human life and material prosperity that should be addressed in a sensible manner whereby the benefits of government actions taken to contain it outweigh the costs. Whether policies are sensible depends on the risks that terrorism poses, the harms that terrorism inflicts, and the costs of anti-terrorism policies. This risk analysis of foreign-born terrorism is a crucial step in evaluating anti-terrorism policies related to immigration.
Topic:
Security, Terrorism, and Immigration
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

99. Rethinking Social Security from a Global Perspective: What Congress Can Learn from the Experiences of Canada, Germany, New Zealand, and Sweden

Author:
Romina Boccia and Ivane Nachkebia
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Social Security is projected to reach technical insolvency by 2033, threatening retirees with automatic 23 percent benefit cuts as the program will be unable to pay full benefits on time. The program’s looming trust-fund insolvency creates a legislative forcing mechanism and thus presents an opportunity to reimagine how Social Security could work. Policymakers should consider fundamentally rethinking the program’s structure and transform it into a system that ensures seniors are protected from poverty when they can no longer work, while also freeing up resources for younger workers to save more on their own. With Social Security running large and rising cash-flow deficits since 2010, and given a political desire to protect most current retirees from being affected by benefit reductions, Congress should act now to stabilize the system—not procrastinate any longer, which only ensures that inevitable changes will be more drastic and economically harmful. The longer Congress waits, the more people will be locked into the current unsustainable system, and the higher the burden will be on younger generations to finance it.
Topic:
Poverty, Reform, Fiscal Policy, Social Security, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Canada, Germany, Sweden, and New Zealand

100. The Misleading Panic over Misinformation

Author:
David Inserra
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Misinformation is widely viewed as one of the most serious challenges facing modern societies. Together with the related terms “disinformation” and “malinformation,” nearly every present-day issue involves claims of misinformation. As a result, a host of actors have dedicated significant amounts of resources to the problem of incorrect or misleading information, especially online.
Topic:
Regulation, Freedom of Expression, and Misinformation
Political Geography:
Global Focus