Development of mathematical models to elaborate strategies, select alternatives and development of plans for adaptation of communities to climate change in different geographical areas including costs to implement it.

There is evidence that the climate changes and that now, the change is influenced and accelerated by the CO2 augmentation in atmosphere due to combustion by humans. Such ?Climate change? is on the policy agenda at the global level, with the aim of understanding and reducing its causes and to mitigate its consequences. In most countries and international organisms UNO (e.g. Rio de Janeiro 1992), OECD, EC, etc . . . the efforts and debates have been directed to know the possible causes, to predict the future evolution of some variable conditioners, and trying to make studies to fight against the effects or to delay the negative evolution of such. The Protocol of Kyoto 1997 set international efforts about CO2 emissions, but it was partial and not followed e.g. by USA and China . . . , and in Durban 2011 the ineffectiveness of humanity on such global real challenges was set as evident. Among all that, the elaboration of a global model was not boarded that can help to choose the best alternative between the feasible ones, to elaborate the strategies and to evaluate the costs, and the authors propose to enter in that frame for study. As in all natural, technological and social changes, the best-prepared countries will have the best bear and the more rapid recover. In all the geographic areas the alternative will not be the same one, but the model must help us to make the appropriated decision. It is essential to know those areas that are more sensitive to the negative effects of climate change, the parameters to take into account for its evaluation, and comprehensive plans to deal with it. The objective of this paper is to elaborate a mathematical model support of decisions, which will allow to develop and to evaluate alternatives of adaptation to the climatic change of different communities in Europe and Latin-America, mainly in especially vulnerable areas to the climatic change, considering in them all the intervening factors. The models will consider criteria of physical type (meteorological, edaphic, water resources), of use of the ground (agriculturist, forest, mining, industrial, urban, tourist, cattle dealer), economic (income, costs, benefits, infrastructures), social (population), politician (implementation, legislation), educative (Educational programs, diffusion) and environmental, at the present moment and the future. The intention is to obtain tools for aiding to get a realistic position for these challenges, which are an important part of the future problems of humanity in next decades.

Development of mathematical models to elaborate strategies, to select alternatives and the development of plans for the adaptation of communities to climate change in different geographical areas including costs to implement it

Climate change is on the policy agenda at the global level, with the aim of understanding and reducing its causes and to mitigate its consequences. In most of the countries and international organisms UNO, OECD, EC, etc … the efforts and debates have been directed to know the possible causes, to predict the future evolution of some variable conditioners, and trying to make studies to fight against the effects or to delay the negative evolution of such. Nevertheless, the elaboration of a global model was not boarded that can help to choose the best alternative between the feasible ones, to elaborate the strategies and to evaluate the costs. As in all natural, technological and social changes, the best-prepared countries will have the best bear and the more rapid recover. In all the geographic areas the alternative will not be the same one, but the model should help us to make the appropriated decision. It is essential to know those areas that are more sensitive to the negative effects of climate change, the parameters to take into account for its evaluation, and comprehensive plans to deal with it. The objective of this paper is to elaborate a mathematical model support of decisions, that will allow to develop and to evaluate alternatives of adaptation to the climatic change of different communities in Europe and Latin-America, mainly, in vulnerable areas to the climatic change, considering in them all the intervening factors. The models will take into consideration criteria of physical type (meteorological, edaphic, water resources), of use of the ground (agriculturist, forest, mining, industrial, urban, tourist, cattle dealer), economic (income, costs, benefits, infrastructures), social (population), politician (implementation, legislation), educative (Educational programs, diffusion), sanitary and environmental, at the present moment and the future.

Analysis of advanced European nuclear fuel cycle scenarios including transmutation and economic estimates

Four European fuel cycle scenarios involving transmutation options (in coherence with PATEROS and CPESFR EU projects) have been addressed from a point of view of resources utilization and economic estimates. Scenarios include: (i) the current fleet using Light Water Reactor (LWR) technology and open fuel cycle, (ii) full replacement of the initial fleet with Fast Reactors (FR) burning U?Pu MOX fuel, (iii) closed fuel cycle with Minor Actinide (MA) transmutation in a fraction of the FR fleet, and (iv) closed fuel cycle with MA transmutation in dedicated Accelerator Driven Systems (ADS). All scenarios consider an intermediate period of GEN-III+ LWR deployment and they extend for 200 years, looking for long term equilibrium mass flow achievement. The simulations were made using the TR_EVOL code, capable to assess the management of the nuclear mass streams in the scenario as well as economics for the estimation of the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and other costs. Results reveal that all scenarios are feasible according to nuclear resources demand (natural and depleted U, and Pu). Additionally, we have found as expected that the FR scenario reduces considerably the Pu inventory in repositories compared to the reference scenario. The elimination of the LWR MA legacy requires a maximum of 55% fraction (i.e., a peak value of 44 FR units) of the FR fleet dedicated to transmutation (MA in MOX fuel, homogeneous transmutation) or an average of 28 units of ADS plants (i.e., a peak value of 51 ADS units). Regarding the economic analysis, the main usefulness of the provided economic results is for relative comparison of scenarios and breakdown of LCOE contributors rather than provision of absolute values, as technological readiness levels are low for most of the advanced fuel cycle stages. The obtained estimations show an increase of LCOE ? averaged over the whole period ? with respect to the reference open cycle scenario of 20% for Pu management scenario and around 35% for both transmutation scenarios. The main contribution to LCOE is the capital costs of new facilities, quantified between 60% and 69% depending on the scenario. An uncertainty analysis is provided around assumed low and high values of processes and technologies.

The environmental and economic effects of innovative measures in urban parcels delivery

The main scope of this research is to identify and evaluate solutions to redesign the parcels delivery logistic process to achieve higher level of quality, lower operational costs, energy consumptions and air pollution. The study is starting from the analysis of the delivery process managed by a leader company operating in Rome. Main delivery flows, personnel and fleet management costs, quality performances and environmental impacts are investigated. The results of this analysis are benchmarked with other European situations. On the basis of the feedback of this analysis, a set of operational measures, potentially able tackle the objectives, are identified and assessed by means of a simulative approach. The assessment is based on environmental and economic indicators allowing the comparison between new and reference scenarios from the viewpoints of the key players: operator, customer and Society. Moreover, the operational measures are combined into alternative packages by looking for the sets capable to maximize the benefits for the key players. The methodology, tested on Rome case study, is general and flexible enough to be extended to parcels delivery problem in different urban contexts, as well as to similar urban distribution problems (e.g. press, food, security, school)

The Opportunity Costs of STEM Degrees and the Unmet Needs of the Low-Skilled: Two labour market problems explained. CEPS Policy Brief No. 295, 26 June 2013

There is general consensus that to achieve employment growth, especially for vulnerable groups, it is not sufficient to simply kick-start economic growth: skills among both the high- and low-skilled population need to be improved. In particular, we argue that if the lack of graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) is a true problem, it needs to be tackled via incentives and not simply via public campaigns: students are not enrolling in ‘hard-science’ subjects because the opportunity cost is very high. As far as the low-skilled population is concerned, we encourage EU and national policy-makers to invest in a more comprehensive view of this phenomenon. The ‘low-skilled’ label can hide a number of different scenarios: labour market detachment, migration, and obsolete skills that are the result of macroeconomic structural changes. For this reason lifelong learning is necessary to keep up with new technology and to shield workers from the risk of skills obsolescence and detachment from the labour market.

The Composition and Drivers of Energy Prices and Costs in Energy-Intensive Industries: The Case of Ceramics, Glass and Chemicals. CEPS Special Report No. 85, 27 March 2014

In May 2013, the European Commission received a mandate from the European Council to “to present an analysis of the composition and drivers of energy prices and costs in Member States, with a particular focus on the impact on households, SMEs and energy intensive industries, and looking more widely at the EU's competitiveness vis-à-vis its global economic counterparts”. Following such mandate and in view of the preparation by the Commission of a Communication and a Staff Working Document, DG Enterprise and Industry commissioned CEPS to carry out a set of studies aimed at providing well-grounded evidence about the evolution and composition of energy prices and costs at plant level within individual industry sectors. A team of CEPS researchers conducted the research, led by Christian Egenhofer and Lorna Schrefler. Vasileios Rizos served as Project Coordinator. Other CEPS researchers contributing to the project included: Fabio Genoese, Andrea Renda, Andrei Marcu, Julian Wieczorkiewicz, Susanna Roth, Federico Infelise, Giacomo Luchetta, Lorenzo Colantoni, Wijnand Stoefs, Jacopo Timini and Felice Simonelli. In addition to an introductory report entitled “About the Study and Cross-Sectoral Analysis”, CEPS prepared five sectoral case studies: two on ceramics (wall and floor tiles and bricks and roof tiles), two on chemicals (ammonia and chlorine) and one on flat glass. Each of these six studies has been consolidated in this single volume for free downloading on the CEPS website. The specific objective was to complement information already available at macro level with a bottom-up perspective on the operating conditions that industry stakeholders need to deal with, in terms of energy prices and costs. The approach chosen was based on case studies for a selected set (sub-)sectors amongst energy-intensive industries. A standard questionnaire was circulated and respondents were sampled according to specified criteria. Data and information collected were finally presented in a structured format in order to guarantee comparability of results between the different (sub-)sectors analysed. The complete set of files can also be downloaded from the European Commission’s website: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newsroom/cf/itemdetail.cfm?item_id=7238&lang=en&title=Study-on-composition-and-drivers-of-energy-prices-and-costs-in-energy-intnsive-industries The results of the studies were presented at a CEPS Conference held on February 26th along with additional evidence from other similar studies. The presentations can be downloaded at: http://www.ceps.eu/event/level-and-drivers-eu-energy-prices-energy-inten...

Europe's social problem and its implications for economic growth. Bruegel Policy Brief 2014/03, 1 April 2014

The European Union faces major social problems. More than six million jobs were lost from 2008-13 and poverty has increased. Fiscal consolidation has generally attempted to spare social protection from spending cuts, but the distribution of adjustment costs between the young and old has been uneven; a growing generational divide is evident, disadvantaging the young. The efficiency of the social security systems of EU countries varies widely. Countries with greater inequality tended to have higher household borrowing prior to the crisis resulting in more subdued consumption growth during the crisis. The resulting high private debt, high unemployment, poverty and more limited access to education undermine long-term growth and social and political stability. Policymakers face three main challenges. First, addressing unemployment and poverty should remain a high priority not only for its own sake, but because these problems undermine public debt sustainability and growth. Second, bold policies in various areas are required. Most labour, social and fiscal policies are the responsibility of member states, requiring national reforms. But better coordination of demand management at European level is also necessary in order to create jobs. Third, tax/benefit systems should be reviewed for improved efficiency, inter- generational equity and fair burden sharing between the wealthy and poor.

A bottomless pit: the costs of Crimea’s annexation by Russia. OSW Commentary No. 143, 29.07.2014

The annexation of Crimea has brought the Russian authorities significant dividends, in particular on the domestic stage: it has resulted in an unprecedented social and political consolidation, and strengthened Vladimir Putin’s position after several years of decline in social support for him. It has provided Russia with strategic benefits, giving it broad access to the Black Sea and the military infrastructure on the peninsula, as well as access to natural gas and crude oil reserves. Russia has also taken over numerous assets (including the tourist infrastructure) previously owned by the Ukrainian state. However, the decision itself concerning Moscow’s annexation of Crimea was taken off the cuff, with no calculation of the costs of integrating it with the Russian legal, political and socio-economic space. Russia took over a region that required subsidies from the Ukrainian budget; moreover, the annexation struck at the most important industry of the Crimean economy – tourism. Crimea’s integration with Russia will be a complex process that entails high costs, financial, organisational and social, including multi-billion dollar investments in the modernisation and development of infrastructure, covering the region’s budget deficit, and paying out social benefits. For reasons of prestige and political significance, Moscow is treating Crimea as a showcase region. Russia is determined to prove that the Crimean incorporation will be beneficial for the region’s economy and will raise people’s living standards. However, the expenses triggered by Crimea’s integration will coincide with a deteriorating economic situation in Russia, aggravated by US and EU sanctions, and this may force Russia to postpone or even give up some of its ambitious investments in the peninsula. Some of the integration costs will have to be borne by other Russian regions, even though they already face serious financial problems that have forced them to reduce their own investment programs. Another issue that has come into question is the fulfilment of the Crimean people’s’ expectations concerning the improvement of their living standards, due to the tourist sector’s problems (small-scale tourist services used to be one of the local people’s main sources of income), the rising costs of maintenance, and finally, restrictions of civil rights after the introduction of the more restrictive Russian legislation.

Economic Implications of Enlargement. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 1/2002

The Eastern enlargement is about to be decided by the European Council. As expected, the “end game “ of the negotiations and assessments is heavily biased by a narrow perspective on net transfers, on income compensations to Central European farmers and on the psychological politics of a single “big bang “. None of these three so-called key items of the end game are of much relevance to appreciate the significance of enlargement. Net transfers have little to do with the costs and benefits of club membership for countries which pay, and can lead to addiction and lethargy rather than extra growth if market integration, macro-economic stability and domestic reforms are not taken serious (as the case of Greece before 1997 has demonstrated). Income compensations for Eastern farmers are crucial for this pressure group, and symbolically of some importance in domestic politics because of the perversity that rich farmers get more, but their absence is likely to serve the public interest in candidate countries far better. And being part of the big bang, as against getting in one or three years later, has assumed a dramatic meaning during this end game, far beyond its true proportions. This hectic European theatre tends to obscure what enlargement is mainly about, now that the stability and values have been secured for the peoples from Central Europe. In a guaranteed setting of peace, freedom and security, enlargement is about greater prosperity.

Mutual recognition in goods and services: an economic perspective. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 2/2002

Mutual recognition is a remarkable innovation facilitating economic intercourse across borders. In the EU's internal goods market it has been helpful in tackling or avoiding the remaining obstacles, namely, regulatory barriers between Member States. However, there is a curious paradox. Despite the almost universal acclaim of the great merits of mutual recognition the principle has, in and by itself, contributed only modestly to the actual realisation of free movement in the single market. It is also surprising that economists have not or hardly underpinned their widespread appreciation for the principle by providing rigorous analysis which could substantiate the case for mutual recognition for policy makers. Business in Europe has shown a sense of disenc hantment with the principle because of the many costs and uncertainties in its application in actual practice. The purpose of the present paper is to provide the economic and strategic arguments for employing mutual recognition much more systematically in the single market for goods and services. The strategic and the "welfare" gains are analysed and adetailed exposition of the fairly high information , transaction and compliance costs is provided. The information costs derive from the fact that mutual recognition remains a distant abstraction for day-to-day business life. Understandably, verifying the "equivalence" of objectives of health and safety between Member States is perceived as difficult and uncertain. This sentiment is exacerbated by the complications of interpreting the equivalence of "effects". In actual practice, these abstractions are expected to override clear and specific national product or services rules, which local inspectors or traders may find problematic without guidance. The paper enumerates several other costs including, inter alia, the absence of sectoral rule books and the next-to-prohibitive costs of monitoring of the application of the principle. The basic problems in applying mutual recognition in the entire array of services are inspected, showing why the principle can only be used in a limited number of services markets and even there it may contribute only modestly to genuine free movement and competitive exposure. A special section is devoted to a range of practical illustrations of the difficulties business experiences when relying on mutual recognition. Finally, the corollary of mutual recognition - regulatory competition - is discussed in terms of a cost/benefits analysis compared to what is often said to be the alternative , that is "harmonisation" , in EU parlance the "new approach" to approximation. The conclusion is that the manifold benefits of mutual recognition for Europe are too great to allow the present ambiguities to continue. The Union needs much more pro-active approaches to reduce the costs of mutual recognition as well as permanent monitoring structures for its application to services (analogous to those already successfully functioning in goods markets). Above all, what is required is a "mutual recognition culture" so that the EU can better enjoy the fruits of its own regulatory ingenuity.

Efficient taxation of multi-national enterprises in the European Union. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 5/2003

Current arrangements for multi-national company taxation in EU are plagued by severe conceptual and administrative problems, leading to high compliance costs, considerable uncertainty and ample room for abuse. Integration is amplifying these difficulties. There are two possible approaches in designing an efficient trans-border corporate tax system for the European Union. The first is to consolidate the EU-wide operations of MNEs, using an agreed common base as the reference variable, and then to apportion this total tax base using some presumptive indicators of activity in each tax jurisdiction – hence, implicitly, of the likely benefits stemming from each location. The apportionment formula should respect requisites of neutrality between productive factors and forms of corporate financing. A radically different approach is also available that offers considerable advantages in terms of efficiency, simplicity and decentralisation, including full administrative autonomy of national tax authorities. It entails abandoning corporate income as the relevant tax base and taxing at a moderate rate some agreed measure of business activity such as company value added, sales or employment. These are the variables usually considered in formula apportionment, but they would apply directly without having first to go through the complications of EU-wide consolidation based on a common-base definition. Reference to a broad base, with no exemptions or deductions, would allow to set low statutory rates.

The Economics of EU Railway Reform. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 8/2004

The EU began railway reform in earnest around the turn of the century. Two ‘railway packages’ have meanwhile been adopted amounting to a series of directives and a third package has been proposed. A range of complementary initiatives has been undertaken or is underway. This BEEP Briefing inspects the main economic aspects of EU rail reform. After highlighting the dramatic loss of market share of rail since the 1960s, the case for reform is argued to rest on three arguments: the need for greater competitiveness of rail, promoting the (market driven) diversion of road haulage to rail as a step towards sustainable mobility in Europe, and an end to the disproportional claims on public budgets of Member States. The core of the paper deals respectively with market failures in rail and in the internal market for rail services; the complex economic issues underlying vertical separation (unbundling) and pricing options; and the methods, potential and problems of introducing competition in rail freight and in passenger services. Market failures in the rail sector are several (natural monopoly, economies of density, safety and asymmetries of information), exacerbated by no less than 7 technical and legal barriers precluding the practical operation of an internal rail market. The EU choice to opt for vertical unbundling (with benefits similar in nature as in other network industries e.g. preventing opaque cross-subsidisation and greater cost revelation) risks the emergence of considerable coordination costs. The adoption of marginal cost pricing is problematic on economic grounds (drawbacks include arbitrary cost allocation rules in the presence of large economies of scope and relatively large common costs; a non-optimal incentive system, holding back the growth of freight services; possibly anti-competitive effects of two-part tariffs). Without further detailed harmonisation, it may also lead to many different systems in Member States, causing even greater distortions. Insofar as freight could develop into a competitive market, a combination of Ramsey pricing (given the incentive for service providers to keep market share) and price ceilings based on stand-alone costs might be superior in terms of competition, market growth and regulatory oversight. The incipient cooperative approach for path coordination and allocation is welcome but likely to be seriously insufficient. The arguments to introduce competition, notably in freight, are valuable and many e.g. optimal cross-border services, quality differentiation as well as general quality improvement, larger scale for cost recovery and a decrease of rent seeking. Nevertheless, it is not correct to argue for the introduction of competition in rail tout court. It depends on the size of the market and on removing a host of barriers; it requires careful PSO definition and costing; also, coordination failures ought to be pre-empted. On the other hand, reform and competition cannot and should not be assessed in a static perspective. Conduct and cost structures will change with reform. Infrastructure and investment in technology are known to generate enormous potential for cost savings, especially when coupled with the EU interoperability programme. All this dynamism may well help to induce entry and further enlarge the (net) welfare gains from EU railway reform. The paper ends with a few pointers for the way forward in EU rail reform.

Why Is Sovereign Debt Restructuring a Challenge? The Case of Greece. Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 24/2012

The reduction of Greek sovereign debt by €106 billion, agreed in the second bailout package of February 2012, is the largest in history. Nevertheless, immediately after publishing the key terms of the package, doubts arose whether it would achieve its goals: to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio to 120.5% in 2020 and to ensure the return of Greece to market financing by 2015. This Briefing gives a timely input to the debate as it develops an analytical framework through which the expected failure of the Greek debt reduction can be assessed. It surveys the economic literature to identify three groups of factors reducing the effectiveness of sovereign debt restructuring: (1) sovereign’s fundamentals, (2) inefficiencies inherent in the restructuring process and (3) costs of restructuring; and applies them to the case of Greece. Based on this analysis, three policy implications are formulated, with relevance to Greece and the wider eurozone. Firstly, the importance of increased policy effort by Greece to enact current structural and growth-enhancing reforms is underlined. Secondly, the introduction of uniform CACs is proposed that will reduce the market participants’ uncertainty, discipline the runs on government debt and address the holdout inefficiency. Finally, sovereign debt restructuring is not recommended as a universal solution for over- indebtedness in the EU, given the direct and reputation costs of sovereign debt restructuring and the self-fulfilling nature of sovereign debt crises.

Has the European ICT sector a chance to be competitive? Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 14/2006

In this paper we try to present the main trends of evolution of the ICT sector. Its dynamics, supported by a constant technical progress in ICs, compounded with “non convexities” such as network effects and high sunk costs, may either lead to a Schumpeter Mark I or Schumpeter Mark II competition regime. This means that in some segments, the market will be more competitive (Mark I), while in other it will be more monopolistic (Mark II). But a key trend is also the so called “convergence”. But digitization makes it cost effective to integrate different communications, information processing and entertainment systems and devices. Hence, Schumpeter Mark II grows at the core where software production dominates, while Schumpeter Mark I is established at the periphery. In this context, the European ICT industry is potentially smashed between two forces: the cost advantages of Asian countries on one hand, the inventiveness and dynamism of the US industry on the other hand. The way out of this very difficult situation is to create in Europe the conditions of restoring knowledge accumulation in a key sub-sector of ICT, that is software production. To do this, Europe can rely on its tradition of cooperation and knowledge sharing and on a set of institutions that have shown their ability to stimulate inter-regional cooperation. By concentrating on an ambitious project of open source software production in embarked systems and domestic networks, Europe could reach several objectives: to make freely accessible an essential facility, to stimulate competition, to help reaching the Lisbon objectives and to restore the European competitiveness in ICT.

Regional Wage and Employment Responses to Market Potential in the EU. Bruges European Economic Research (BEER) Papers 3/November 2005

Recent theoretical work on economic geography emphasizes the interplay of transport costs and plant-level increasing returns. In these models, the spatial distribution of demand is a key determinant of economic outcomes. In one strand, it is argued that higher demand gives rise to a more than proportionate increase in production, a result known as the home market effect. Another strand emphasizes the effects of market sizes on factor prices. We highlight the theoretical connection between these two strands. Using data on 57 European regions, we show how wages and employment respond to differentials in what we call real market potential, a discounted sum of demands derived from the theory.