Measuring competitiveness in Europe: resource allocation, granularity and trade. Bruegel Blueprint Series Volume XVIV, January 2016

One of the most important lessons learned during the 2008-09 financial crisis was that the informational toolbox on which policymakers base their decisions about competitiveness became outdated in terms of both data sources and data analysis. The toolbox is particularly outdated when it comes to tapping the potential of micro data for the analysis of competitiveness – a serious problem given that it is firms, rather than countries that compete on global markets.

Concording EU trade and production data over time. National Bank of Belgium Working Paper No. 239, December 2012

This paper provides concordance procedures for product-level trade and production data in the EU and examines the implications of changing product classifications on measured product adding and dropping at Belgian firms. Using the algorithms developed by Pierce and Schott (2012a, 2012b), the paper develops concordance procedures that allow researchers to trace changes in coding systems over time and to translate product-level production and trade data into a common classification that is consistent both within a single year and over time. Separate procedures are created for the eightdigit Combined Nomenclature system used to classify international trade activities at the product level within the European Union as well as for the eight-digit Prodcom categories used to classify products in European domestic production data. The paper further highlights important differences in coverage between the Prodcom and Combined Nomenclature classifications which need to be taken into account when generating combined domestic production and international trade data at the product level. The use of consistent product codes over time results in less product adding and dropping at continuing firms in the Belgian export and production data.

Changing trade patterns, unchanging European and global governance. Bruegel Working Paper 2014/02, February 2014

The world economy is going through its biggest transformation in a relatively short space time. There have been many explanations for this phenomenon but the unprecedented scale and pace of this change and, most crucially, its implications, still seems little understood. In turn, there has been little preparation for, or adjustment to, this changing world, though if the change continues at this pace, the effectiveness of many global institutions in their current form will be threatened. We highlight the dramatic degree of the shifts taking place in world GDP and trade and include fresh projections of what world trade patterns might look like in 2020, should the trends observed over the past decade to continue. We also show the resulting shift in trade relationships for many key countries. European member states tend to have quite different trading partners’ profiles, and this heterogeneity is quite likely to become more pronounced with time. This, in turn, suggests a significant challenge for the effective functioning of the euro area and weakens the original rationale of its creation. If our projections to 2020 are broadly right, then many established frameworks for the running of the world economy and its governance are not going to be fit for purpose, and will need to change. The global monetary system itself, and global organisations such as the IMF, G7, and G20 are going to have to adapt considerably if they want to remain legitimate representatives of the world order. The alternative is their relegation to irrelevance.

Western Europe and Japan: Trade War or Trade Peace. Congressional Record, proceedings and debates of the 91st Congress, first session. Volume 115, No. 187, 13 November 1969

Western Europe and Japan: Trade war and trade peace

EU Policy on Climate Change Mitigation since Copenhagen and the Economic Crisis. CEPS Working Document No. 380, 5 March 2013

The EU has long assumed leadership in advancing domestic and international climate change policy. While pushing its partners in international negotiations, it has led the way in implementing a host of domestic measures, including a unilateral and legally binding target, an ambitious policy on renewable energy and a strategy for low-carbon technology deployment. The centrepiece of EU policy, however, has been the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), a cap-and-trade programme launched in 2005. The ETS has been seen as a tool to ensure least-cost abatement, drive EU decarbonisation and develop a global carbon market. After an initial review and revision of the ETS, to come into force in 2013, there was a belief that the new ETS was ‘future-proof’, meaning able to cope with the temporary lack of a global agreement on climate change and individual countries’ emission ceilings. This confidence has been shattered by the simultaneous ‘failure’ of Copenhagen to deliver a clear prospect of a global (top-down) agreement and the economic crisis. The lack of prospects for national caps at the international level has led to a situation whereby many member states hesitate to pursue ambitious climate change policies. In the midst of this, the EU is assessing its options anew. A number of promising areas for international cooperation exist, all centred on the need to ‘raise the ambition level’ of GHG emission reductions, notably in aviation and maritime, short-lived climate pollutions, deforestation, industrial competitiveness and green growth. Public policy issues in the field of technology and its transfer will require more work to identify real areas for cooperation.