Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (24)
- Article (17)
- Working Paper (12)
- Contribution to a Periodical (6)
- Editorship book (3)
- Book (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Monetary policy (3)
- EU politics (2)
- Economic and monetary integration (2)
- Economic and monetary union (2)
- Economic governance (2)
- Fiscal policy (2)
- Political integration (2)
- Wirtschaftspolitik (2)
- Crisis resolution (1)
- Debt restructuring (1)
- Democratic deficit (1)
- Demokratie (1)
- Economic and Monetary Union (1)
- Economic and Monetary Union in Europe (EMU) (1)
- Economic policies (1)
- Euro (1)
- Europa (1)
- European Central Bank (ECB) (1)
- Finanzkrise (1)
- Finanzmarktkrise (1)
- Finanzmarktkrisen (1)
- Fiscal policy-making (1)
- Freihandel (1)
- Legitimacy (1)
- Legitimation (1)
- Legitimität (1)
- Makroökonomie (1)
- Politische Ökonomie (1)
- Schuldenkrisen (1)
- Sovereign default (1)
- Staatsbankrotte (1)
- Staatsoberhaupt (1)
- Vereinigte Staaten (1)
- Wage-setting (1)
- Wahl (1)
- Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion (1)
- banking union, capital markets, European governance, eurozone governance, finance & financial regulation, fiscal policy, monetary union, Sovereign debt (1)
- internationale politische Ökonomie (1)
- nationales Parlament (1)
- wirtschaftspolitische Steuerung (EU) (1)
"A review of both the expenditure and revenue sides of the EU budget – with no taboos – was agreed as part of the 2005 settlement of the EU budget for the period 2007-13. This study is intended to inform debate on the revenue side. It investigates two main questions: how well does the current system for raising revenue for the EU budget function; and how could it be improved. [...]"
Scholarship of multi-level governance has developed into one of the most innovative themes of research in political science and public policy. This accessible Handbook presents a thorough review of the wide-ranging literature, encompassing various theoretical and conceptual approaches to multi-level governance and their application to policy-making in domestic, regional and global contexts.
The importance of multi-level governance in specific policy areas is highlighted, and the contributors – an international group of highly renowned scholars – report on the ways in which their field of specialization is or may be affected by multi-level governance and how developments could affect its conceptualization. European integration is considered from its unique standpoint as the key catalyst in the development of multi-level approaches, and the use of multi-level governance in other parts of the world, at both domestic and regional levels, is also considered in detail before focus is shifted towards global governance. The Handbook concludes with a presentation of six policy fields and instruments affected by multi-level governance, including: social policy, environmental policy, economic policy, international taxation, standard-setting and policing.
This comprehensive Handbook takes stock of the vast array of multi-level governance theory and research developed in subfields of political science and public policy, and as such will provide an invaluable reference tool for scholars, researchers and students with a special interest in public policy, regulation and governance.
We review the initial predictions and claims regarding economic and monetary union (EMU) in Europe against the evidence of its first ten years of existence. We argue that pessimistic views on the creation of EMU have proved to be wrong. Yet EMU's success is rather puzzling, since it is based on a peculiar institutional structure not thought to lead to success. EMU has generated redistributive effects and may have increased business-cycle synchronization. Those effects have not translated into the expected decrease of legitimacy or a widespread democratic deficit of EMU. At the institutional level, EMU has coped well with an asymmetric framework, largely decoupling EMU from political union. There have been neither major spill-over effects pushing for further political integration nor conflict and disintegration. The main question for the future is whether this institutional structure will stay the same in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.
Weiterentwicklung der WWU
(2015)
We study the occurrence of holdout litigation in the context of sovereign defaults. The number of creditor lawsuits against foreign governments has strongly increased over the past decades, but there is a large variation across crisis events. Why are some defaults followed by litigation and others not? What explains the general increase in lawsuits? We address these questions using an economic model of litigation and a new data set capturing the near universe of cases filed against defaulting sovereigns. We find that creditors are more likely to litigate when debt restructurings are large, when governments impose high losses (haircuts), and when the defaulting country is more vulnerable to litigation (open economies and those with a low legal capacity). We conclude that sovereign debt lawsuits can be predicted reasonably well with a simple framework from the law and economics literature.
The crisis generated by the Covid-19 pandemic has required rapid and strong action. It also entails key choices, including on how the EU could help mitigate the impact of Covid-19, foster the economic recovery and support the dual green and digital transitions. In September 2019, before the crisis, the Directorate General for Economy and Finance of the European Commission organised a workshop on strengthening the institutional architecture of the EMU. This eBook presents the main ideas discussed at the workshop.
In der Gründungsphase der Währungsunion konzentrierten sich die deutschen Forderungen auf niedrige Inflationsraten und geringe Staatsverschuldung. Mit Beginn der Krise wurde jedoch deutlich, dass der deutsche Stabilitätsgedanke sehr eng gefasst war. Neben der fehlenden Haushaltsdisziplin trugen andere Faktoren maßgeblich zur Instabilität der Eurozone bei: Sowohl Leistungsbilanzungleichgewichte, als auch das Fehlen von Instrumenten zum Krisenmanagement und die gefährlichen selbstverstärkenden Dynamiken zwischen geschwächten Banken und überschuldeten Staaten wurden vor der Krise weitgehend ignoriert.
Im Verlauf der Krise hat die deutsche Regierung an ihrer traditionellen Vorstellung von Stabilität durch Kontrolle und Überwachung der Mitgliedsstaaten festgehalten. Zugleich hat Deutschland auch immer wieder pragmatisch gehandelt, um die Eurozone zu erhalten. So war das Land maßgeblich an der Schaffung des Europäischen Stabilitätsmechanismus und dem Aufbau einer Bankenunion beteiligt und tolerierte eine Reihe von außergewöhnlichen Maßnahmen der EZB.
Trotz der Reformbemühungen der letzten Jahre weist die Eurozone weiterhin Konstruktionsfehler auf, die die Stabilität der gemeinsamen Währung ernsthaft gefährden. Unter den Mitgliedsstaaten herrscht jedoch Uneinigkeit über die richtige Euro-Architektur: In der aktuellen Reform-Debatte prallen unterschiedliche Wahrnehmungen der Probleme und unterschiedliche politische Präferenzen für die Zukunft der Eurozone aufeinander. Die deutsche Europapolitik sollte sich um eine konstruktive Rolle in den notwendigen anstehenden Reformen bemühen. Hierbei gilt es auszubuchstabieren, unter welchen Umständen eine erhöhte Risikoteilung in der Eurozone für Deutschland tragbar wäre.