Afleveringen
-
Why AI World is providing the key insights that are shaping the AI revolutionBy Andrea Renda and Pierre-Alexandre Balland
We live in a complex world, rich with data and insights, where finding our way is becoming increasingly challenging. As Herbert Simon wrote back in the 1950s, ‘a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention’. And when there’s a dearth of attention, knowing where to look becomes an uphill battle.
Nowhere is this truer than in the burgeoning world of AI. New policies and standards are emerging every day. Large corporations update their models, while startups secure funding to drive innovation. Scientific collaboration spans across continents, researchers tap into software and data swaths to achieve new breakthroughs, all while business leaders form alliances and politicians ponder their next moves. All this in a frantic effort to ride the wave of the most powerful general-purpose technology of the past few decades.
For businesses, policymakers and investors, understanding the AI revolution requires improved skills in locating, processing and analysing data to detect patterns and forecast trends.
And even if they do find the data, understanding what it means often requires guidance, analysis and easy access to technical and non-technical explanations. After all, knowing where we are is a key prerequisite for understanding where we’re going.
To bridge this knowledge gap, CEPS has created a large-scale data platform called AI World. It’s a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all things AI, from insights on market developments, and leading companies and locations, to emerging applications and techniques.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Yes, COP29 was too little, too late. But it’s a reality we must accept – at least for nowBy Irina Kustova, Christian Dietz and Renske van Hoof
COP29 left many disappointed, seen by many as a choice between failure and disaster. Fair criticism but the Paris Agreement is still delivering as it was designed to do – namely a bottom-up, consensus-driven framework.
While COP29 was mainly seen as a stepping stone to COP30, when updated national climate plans are expected to be presented, the bar was set high this year for hammering out a landmark climate finance deal. However, COP outcomes often reflect the lowest common denominator; some proposals are inevitably too modest for some and too ambitious for others.
This means success or failure is rarely a clear-cut binary. While these two weeks of COPs always capture the global spotlight, they’re merely steps in an incremental, consensus-driven process. As the European Commissioner for Climate aptly put it: ‘It is less than what we would have liked, but better than we feared’.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
All chill, no grill – and other key takeaways from the 2024 Commission confirmation hearingsBy Sophia Russack
The European Parliament (EP) hearings for the new Commissioners are now over. After some last-minute drama and a little delay, the EP has greenlit all candidates – for the first time in 20 years.
In theory, the confirmation hearings are a great instrument for scrutinising the incoming Commissioners. Such a process can be healthy, especially for a complex polity like the EU (i.e. often accused of being untransparent and unaccountable). In practice, however, it’s compromised by party-political tit-for-tat and structural issues around how it’s organised. Below are my five main takeaways from the last three weeks.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Trump’s back – now the EU must step up its gameBy J. Scott Marcus
The Free World that we knew has been transformed overnight and now we in the EU must deal with the world as it is. That the United States has decisively chosen to be led by a man who is a convicted felon, who lies far more often than he tells the truth and who tried to steal the 2020 election by violent means – these might be issues for America and for Americans to now deal with.
That the US has chosen to be led by a man who is enamoured with authoritarian rulers, who sees no merit in promoting liberal democratic values worldwide, who places no great value on America’s allies and who is prone to protectionist tariffs and trade wars – these are issues for us in the EU to now deal with.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
From a Capital Markets Union towards a robust Savings and Investment UnionBy Karel Lannoo, Jesper Berg and Apostolos Thomadakis
Sustaining the current progress towards a Capital Markets Union (CMU) requires both strong political commitment and high prioritisation. While integration is often cited as a key objective, the more fundamental issue for EU capital markets is their limited depth rather than integration alone. Unlike more market-based financial systems, the EU’s financial system relies heavily on banks, where deposits are liquid and nominal in value. This creates a mismatch when it comes to financing long-term, illiquid investments typical of capital markets.
Within the EU, there is a significant and positive correlation between institutional savings and the robustness of capital markets in individual countries. For example, in the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark, where institutional savings are high – especially in pension funds and life insurance companies – capital markets tend to be more advanced. This is partly due to the prevalence of pre-funded pension systems in contrast to the pay-as-you-go pension systems dominant in other EU nations. Importantly, pre-funded pensions not only bolster capital markets but also improve fiscal sustainability by reducing dependency on current revenues to fund retirement benefits.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
The cordon sanitaire is quietly fraying in the European ParliamentBy Sophia Russack
While in some EU Member States, there is still a firewall against the far right, at the European level, cooperation between conservatives and the far right is taking place without much fuss. This is already apparent in the way the hearings of the designated Commissioners are being organised in the European Parliament, starting on 4 November. The process of critical questioning is becoming increasingly party-politicised. The largest political faction, the conservative European People’s Party (EPP), has advantages in the process. What’s more, it seems ready to work with the far right.
This is dangerous because it increases the risk that party-political considerations will overshadow what this procedure is actually about, which is to check whether candidates are suitable for influential Commissioner posts. That could compromise Parliament’s role in oversight.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Did we just witness Georgia go from dream to nightmare?By Tinatin Akhvlediani
On 26 October, Georgians went to the polls in a critical parliamentary election that President Salome Zourabichvili described as a referendum on the country’s European future. It is a future that Georgians have fervently supported through countless rallies and protests in recent years against the pro-Kremlin drift of the current ruling party, Georgian Dream (GD).
This election, the first conducted under a fully proportional system, raised hopes of a multi-party government. Yet, instead of marking a turning point, GD claimed a sweeping 54 % of the vote, securing 89 out of 150 seats in parliament, thus clinging onto majority control for the fourth consecutive term since 2012.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
The new European Commission must deliver for Europe’s future – but excessively emphasising ‘competitiveness’ could hinder thisBy Karel Lannoo
Tackling Europe’s economic decline, preparing and adapting for a new wave of enlargement and defending Europe’s geopolitical position… the new European Commission will definitely need to deliver. The past five years have shown that it can prepare and react when it needs to, responding on the spot to multiple crises. But the path ahead will be steep.
The economic challenges are undoubtedly enormous. Mario Draghi’s recent report outlined them clearly. There’s doubt over Europe’s ability to create wealth. It doesn’t invest or innovate enough, it doesn’t spend enough on R&D and it lacks high-skilled labour. Europe also needs to prepare for a rapidly ageing population and invest much more in defence.
Europe’s productivity gap with the US is somewhere between 12 %-30 %, depending on the measure used. And as the Letta Report also laid out well, the EU is just not enough of a single market – it’s too fragmented in finance and digital services, and energy is far too expensive.
There have undoubtedly been many challenging moments for the EU. Jean-Claude Juncker spoke about the ‘last chance’ Commission more than a decade ago. Competitiveness was already a major concern at the turn of the millennium – think back to the 2000 Lisbon Declaration and Germany’s then-sorry state in 2000-03 as the ‘sick man’ of Europe.
Yet the EU has demonstrated that it can react to unexpected events. Apart from the green and digital transition, the Commission spearheaded the EU response to Covid-19, to the energy crisis and to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The EU adopted the Sure programme and the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) to prevent an economic meltdown. It unanimously adopted 14 packages of sanctions against Russia and agreed in June 2022 to grant candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova, with accession negotiations starting exactly two years later.
What’s problematic now is the extreme right’s increased size in the European Parliament (EP) and many Member States. Compared to 15 years ago, the ‘centrist’ parties’ (EPP, S&D, Renew and the Greens) share of EP seats have declined from about 85 to 65 %. The extreme right parties have all adopted populist policies to win voters’ favour, be it with anti-immigration (or just purely racist) posturing, protectionist policies and/or irresponsible fiscal measures.
Such policies will certainly not improve Europe’s competitiveness – especially when there’s still, even after Letta and Draghi, no real consensus on what competitiveness actually is. And thus, this is why the new Commission’s use of ‘competitiveness’ as a possible guiding mantra for the next five years is fraught with difficulties.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Following July’s CrowdStrike outage, this is how we can avoid the next ‘Blue Friday’By Lorenzo Pupillo
On 19 July, the world experienced ‘Blue Friday’ when 8.5 million PC screens worldwide were hit by the infamous Blue Screen of Death (BSOD), a critical error message displayed by Microsoft Windows when the system encounters a serious issue that it cannot recover from.
This unprecedented outage was triggered by a faulty update from CrowdStrike, a leading cybersecurity provider. The disruption affected government services, emergency operations, transport, payment systems and financial markets across the world.
While not a cyberattack, its scale was historic and raised two major concerns. First, the failure stemmed from a CrowdStrike update that was meant to protect networks. Second, fixing the problem required manual intervention – rebooting each computer into Windows’ Safe Mode and applying a patch, a very time-consuming process when you’re talking about millions of devices.
Some have since argued that new regulation is necessary to ensure such a shock doesn’t happen again – in the EU, this isn’t necessary. We already have what we need in the form of two strong pieces of legislation, the Network and Information System 2 Directive (NIS2) and the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA). They just need to be implemented properly, combined with better preparedness and a concerted effort to expand the number of trusted security software providers.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
A war without end – must the EU remain a bystander in the Middle East?By James Moran
With Israel on the warpath around the region, despite international efforts to shift the conflicts from the battlefield to the negotiation table, there are growing fears about the consequences for the wider world, including in the EU.
Whether the US can rein in Israel’s military machine is an open question. The record doesn’t bode well. Months of US-facilitated talks on ceasefires in Gaza and lately at the UN on Lebanon have had very little effect on Israel. That’s because Benjamin Netanyahu has realised that it’s in his interests to undermine these negotiations – perhaps believing that endless fighting rather than sitting down to actually talk helps to keep him and his extremist allies in power.
He may be right. Spurred by perceptions of military prowess and a classic ‘rally round the flag’ mentality, recent polls in Israel show growing public support for his government, as the memory of his intelligence failures a year ago fades.
One thing is clear – this Israeli administration is probably the least interested in peace since Israel’s founding in 1948 when it comes to addressing the conflicts’ root cause, namely peace with the Palestinians. Netanyahu is on the record as being fiercely opposed to any two-state solution and has constantly eschewed any peace process.
To make matters worse, a year on from 7 October, Israel has yet to articulate a longer-term political strategy for ‘the day after’ the guns fall silent. Many fear that their intentions might involve the (re)occupation of Gaza and south Lebanon, and the theft of more Palestinian land for illegal West Bank settlements, a recipe for a true ‘forever war’. Yet another angry generation is growing up amidst the unprecedented carnage and rubble of Gaza and elsewhere.
With the US preoccupied with its upcoming election, Washington’s impotence will probably continue for some time. Should Trump prevail, American support for peace efforts may well evaporate entirely.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
A ‘nearly’ gender-balanced Commission isn’t good enough. It’s actually an ominous omen for advancing gender equality in the EUBy Marta Dell’Aquila
During these frantic days at the beginning of a new mandate, at a time when the new College of Commissioners is being formed, Ursula von der Leyen’s commitment to achieve full gender balance – shown as being important to her since the very beginning of her first mandate – is not being realised. Despite her request for one male and one female candidate and some last-minute changes, many Member States still only nominated men.
We now know who has been selected to form the new College (pending the European Parliament’s approval) – and it doesn’t look good.
First, there’s no dedicated Commissioner for Equality, as this will be handled together with the crisis management and preparedness portfolios. Secondly, out of a College of 27, only 11 (or around 40 % and including von der Leyen herself) are women. Technically speaking, this would satisfy the gender balance criterion – but just barely.
So maybe this isn’t the worst outcome imaginable but the cold hard reality is that von der Leyen failed in her quest to achieve meaningful gender balance – because Member States simply decided to ignore her (not unreasonable) request.
To be sure, it’s challenging to advocate for gender equality in a highly political landscape where several countries have shifted to the right and the ‘success’ of some anti-gender movements has been an unsettling development. And if Member States openly disregard the importance of a simple yet crucial gender-balance request from the President of the European Commission no less, the starting point for continuing progress is not ideal.
Even worse, the risk is that the EU waters down – or even backslides on – some of the key achievements of the past few years in this crucial domain. This cannot be allowed to happen.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Why we need to rewire Europe’s financial sector – to end fragmentation and bolster integrationBy Apostolos Thomadakis
If Europe wants to stay ahead of the curve and be able to follow – and eventually lead – its international counterparts, the new European Commission should have a focused agenda that balances regulatory simplicity with forward-looking strategies. This is particularly the case in capital market integration, bank competitiveness, digital finance and sustainability.
Over the past few decades, Europe’s financial system has grown in size and complexity but remains largely bank-centric compared with more market-oriented systems. Important efforts have been made to diversify, deepen and integrate the EU’s financial markets, including significant legislative initiatives like the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and the Banking Union.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
The EU according to Draghi – as competitive as needed, as sustainable as possibleBy Andrea Renda
Landing on Ursula von der Leyen’s desk just as she’s putting together the new College of Commissioners, the long-awaited report by Mario Draghi on ‘the future of European competitiveness’ totals almost 400 pages collaboratively drafted by two (invisible) teams in Brussels and Rome.
Draghi‘s opus magnum doesn’t disappoint when it comes to length and ambition, and is full of interesting proposals, especially in its ‘Part B’. Yet given the vision it puts forward, it will have no doubt also raise some eyebrows given its emphasis on growth and competitiveness over social and environmental stances. It’s also a loud wake-up call that too much might end up being proposed – perhaps too late – and without any form of ‘Plan B’.
The first part of the report, which outlines a competitiveness strategy for Europe, could be seen as merely restating the many challenges the EU has faced over the past two decades. These include sluggish productivity growth; encumbered and impaired decision-making; increased dependency on other world powers; the piling up of massive regulatory burdens on businesses, impairing innovation; Europe’s outrageously high energy prices; and the EU’s fragmentation and related inability to deepen integration in key areas of the economy.
Thus, nothing new at the end of the day – if anything, this part of the report reads like many dozens of analyses produced by international consultancy firms or the International Monetary Fund. Yet Draghi adds a more dramatic tone as he explains that the EU faces an ‘existential challenge‘ and that failure to act will lead to its eventual collapse.
That said, the report is centred around a rather narrow notion of competitiveness – and in a rather uncompromising way. Other objectives, such as decarbonisation and social cohesion, appear ancillary at best. In fact, 400 pages down, the reader still lacks a precise definition of competitiveness.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Why it’s businesses (and not the European Commission) that need to ensure sustainable supply chainsBy Katharina Weber
It’s the same old story – when push comes to shove, no one wants to pay, especially for sustainability. We want more sustainable practices, production and supply chains but there are few who are willing to actually open their wallets for such a cause.
In the last few weeks several actors have urged the European Commission to delay implementing the EU’s Regulation on Deforestation-free Products (EUDR), including the US. and various industry associations.
Preparations are in full swing for the regulation to come into effect at the end of this year. And as the public sector and industry each experience their own difficulties to ensure they’re ready, there are still unresolved questions over who should pay for the regulation’s additional requirements.
Supply chain regulations aim to prevent companies from using environmental or social malpractices as a competitive advantage. The EUDR specifically targets deforestation driven by agriculture, aimed at minimising the EU’s contribution to deforestation and forest degradation worldwide.
Public debate on the EUDR is marked by controversy. Indonesia and Malaysia have been very vocal in condemning it as a neo-colonial protectionist instrument. Many NGOs, on the other hand, have welcomed the regulation as a way to take responsibility for deforestation from the demand side. Still, this support doesn’t come without concerns and dissatisfaction over the EU’s unilateral approach, smallholder livelihoods, human rights and overall design loopholes.
While these are important elements to consider, one group is conspicuously missing in the whole debate – multinational corporations. And this needs to be rectified if regulations such as the EUDR are to successfully achieve their aims and purpose.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
With the Harris-Trump battle in full swing, the EU must take the future of the transatlantic relationship into its own handsBy Camille Ford and Dylan Macchiarini Crosson
After last week’s Democratic National Convention (DNC), Europeans may start studying the polling data coming out of rural Pennsylvania or Michigan to gauge their fate. While recent polling suggests President Biden’s decision to pass the torch has provided a much-needed boost to the Democrats, that doesn’t negate the real possibility of a second Trump presidency.
Rather than frantically trying to read the tea leaves, Europeans should instead look to candidates’ recent records as well as their national convention performances to understand how they see the future of US foreign policy – and how it will impact transatlantic security, trade and climate cooperation.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Venezuela’s election shows that technology can be democracy’s ally – and not only an enemyBy Andrea Renda
Digital technology is often accused of enabling surveillance and abuse. From China’s Big Brother social credit system to Silicon Valley’s surveillance capitalism, experts have warned of the enormous power that governments and large platforms can gain by controlling online content. Yet it would be a mistake to call the technology itself responsible.
Rather, its malicious design and use is to blame – a well-designed, digitally-enabled democratic process can actually protect and empower citizens in the face of corrupt or rotten institutions. In short, technology is both a problem and a solution when it comes to protecting democracy. It can allow non-democratic regimes to claim they won an election, even when they clearly didn’t; or it can help bring the truth to the surface, proving that the king isn’t wearing new clothes and is actually stark naked.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
How to future-proof NATO’s defence innovation and EDT strategyBy Raluca Csernatoni
Developing disruptive ways of warfare and advanced technological capabilities is a critical function for any military organisation, including NATO. Yet relying exclusively on technological superiority and novel technologies to sustain outdated ways of fighting has significant drawbacks.
That is why understanding all the socio-technical factors that cause disruptive innovation should be a vital concern for NATO leaders. Indeed, ‘disruptive innovation’ doesn’t just happen – rather it starts with a mission-oriented vision, organisational changes and managing uncertainty.
In an increasingly uncertain era, from rapid advancements in Emerging and Disruptive Technologies (EDTs) to shifting geopolitical tensions, NATO faces many challenges. Threats are constantly evolving, from small and agile groups inventively exploiting commercial technology, to vast civil and military resources being operated by corporate giants and great powers.
In this respect, innovation is the lifeblood of defence organisations like NATO and why the Alliance’s approach to harnessing cutting-edge technologies will define its future operational success and relevance.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Labour has moved first to reset the EU-UK relationship – Brussels needs to sit up and listenBy Daniel Cassidy-Deketelaere
Labour’s stonking general election victory on 4 July could raise hopes on both sides of the Channel that the UK may now seek to reverse at least some aspects of Boris Johnson’s hard Brexit. Alas, new prime minister Sir Keir Starmer won’t be clambering for closer (re)integration anytime soon. The key EU message from Labour’s election manifesto can be summarised as: no single market, no customs union, no freedom of movement. Starmer even said just before the election that Britain ‘would not rejoin the EU in my lifetime’ (he’s 61).
And with a clear emphasis on domestic priorities, Labour’s electoral coalition being on shakier ground than its large majority would have you believe and the post-election threat from the populist right, it’s safe to assume Starmer isn’t bluffing. He won’t be seeking deeper economic or political reintegration with the EU anytime soon – even if it does rationally make economic sense.
But the manifesto did pledge to ‘reset the relationship and seek to deepen ties with our European friends, neighbours and allies’. Labour has now begun to outline what it means by this. In a deeply unsettled world, its initial suggestions and ideas are cautiously positive – and the EU needs to sit up and listen to them.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Blood, toil, tears and sweat: the European Political Community’s summit in the UKBy Dylan Macchiarini Crosson and Steven Blockmans
The European Political Community (EPC) meets on 18 July for the fourth time. Hosted by the UK at Blenheim Palace, the birthplace of Winston Churchill, echoes of his ‘blood, toil, tears and sweat’ speech in May 1940 cannot be ignored. Facing an existential battle on the continent, Keir Starmer, the UK’s freshly elected prime minister, will have a baptism of fire at the first major international gathering he’ll host.
Due to the EPC’s origins and aims – namely to show a united front against Russia and provide a forum for strategic intimacy amongst leaders of 47 European countries (plus the EU) on equal footing – the format is a high-stakes gamble in diplomacy.
The previous underwhelming summit in Spain was boycotted by Türkiye’s strongman Erdoğan and his Azeri counterpart Aliyev, and even the photo-op was mishandled. The UK must get this summit right to keep the EPC on track.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Europe can produce its own tech giants — here’s howBy J. Scott Marcus
Why does the EU fail to produce its own Google, Amazon or Facebook? Is Europe lacking entrepreneurship, technical savvy or simply imagination? Contrary to what many think, the EU does even better than the US at creating high-tech start-ups; however, many European firms whither on the vine due to a lack of finance.
Yet a simple solution has been lying in plain sight for decades – we simply need to grasp it. The answer, as with a great many questions, is money. In each of the past five years, the EU has created more high-tech start-ups than the US. Nonetheless, many of them fail to scale up, while some move to greener pastures on the other side of the Atlantic.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
