In sickness and in health: protecting and supporting public investment in Europe. Bruegel Policy Contribution 2014/02, February 2014

The long-term decline in gross public investment in European Union countries mirrors the trend in other advanced economies, but recent developments have been different: public investment has increased elsewhere, but in the EU it has declined and even collapsed in the most vulnerable countries, exaggerating the output fall. The provisions in the EU fiscal framework to support public investment are very weak.The recently inserted ‘investment clause’ is almost no help. In the short term, exclusion of national co-funding of EU-supported investments from the fiscal indicators considered in the Stability and Growth Pact would be sensible. In the medium term, the EU fiscal framework should be extended with an asymmetric ‘golden rule’ to further protect public investment in bad times, while limiting adverse incentives in good times. During a downturn, a European investment programme is needed and the European Semester should encourage greater investment by member states with healthy public finances and low public investment rates. Reform and harmonisation of budgeting, accounting, transparency and project assessment is also needed to improve the quality of public investment.

Cities: The Juncker Commission should not miss this key to growth, jobs and the environment. CEPS Commentary, 3 October 2014

Cities, more particularly ‘smart’ cities, could become a catalyst for economic and social development. For this to happen, Europe will need a new type of integrated infrastructure, a new urban governance and policy structure, as well as new finance and business models. Successful smart projects will eventually develop into new business models and companies. While the European Commission cannot mandate or regulate this top down, it has a role to play in nurturing new initiatives to allow Europe the possibility of developing its own Google and Apple.

Does Mandatory IFRS Adoption in the EU Level the International Playing Field Between Foreign and Domestic Analysts? ACES Working Papers, October 2011

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) have been promoted as a global set of financial reporting standards that will help integrate global capital markets. We examine whether the mandatory European-wide adoption of IFRS in 2005 improved the forecast accuracy for foreign analysts relative to that of domestic analysts. We find that, on average, foreign analysts experience no incremental improvement in forecast accuracy relative to domestic analysts. However, we find that those foreign analysts who are familiar with IFRS do experience an incremental improvement in forecast accuracy relative to domestic analysts. We also find that this incremental improvement in forecast accuracy relative to domestic analysts is concentrated among firms domiciled in countries with both strong enforcement regimes and domestic accounting standards that differ significantly from IFRS. Our results highlight that both familiarity with IFRS and the quality of countries' enforcement environments play key roles in determining the extent to which IFRS adoption can reduce information asymmetry between foreign and domestic analysts.