Time filter

Source Type

Agency: Cordis | Branch: FP7 | Program: CP-FP | Phase: SSH.2011.4.3-1 | Award Amount: 3.23M | Year: 2012

In an era of global flux, emerging powers and growing interconnectedness, transatlantic relations appear to have lost their bearings. As the international system fragments into different constellations of state and non-state powers across different policy domains, the US and the EU can no longer claim exclusive leadership in global governance. Not only the ability, but also the willingness of the US and the EU to exercise leadership together can no longer be taken for granted. Political, economic, and social elites on both shores of the Atlantic express different views on whether the US and the EU should be bound together, freelance, or seek alternative partnerships in a confusing multipolar world. Traditional paradigms to understand the transatlantic relationship are thus wanting. A new approach is needed to pinpoint the direction transatlantic relations are taking. TRANSWORLD provides such an approach. By combining an inter-disciplinary analysis of transatlantic relations, including desk research, in-depth interviews, an elite survey and a sophisticated Delphi exercise to elaborate solid policy proposals, TRANSWORLD would: a) ascertain, differentiating among four policy domains (economic, security, environment, and human rights/democracy), whether transatlantic relations are drifting apart, adapting along an ad hoc cooperation-based pattern, or evolving into a different but resilient special partnership; b) assess the role of a re-defined transatlantic relationship in the global governance architecture; c) provide tested policy recommendations on how the US and the EU could best cooperate to enhance the viability, effectiveness, and accountability of governance structures. In so doing, TRANSWORLD, which features a thirteen-partner transatlantic consortium of attested academic, policy, dissemination and management excellence, would contribute to an inter-disciplinary transatlantic research area, with in-built connections to policy-making.

Balasegaram M.,Access France | Clift C.,The Royal Institute of International Affairs | Rottingen J.-A.,Norwegian Institute of Public Health | Rottingen J.-A.,Harvard University
Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics | Year: 2015

The dangers presented by antibiotic resistance (ABR) have now established themselves as a global health security issue. From an international policy perspective, three key pillars have been established - responsible access, conservation, and innovation. These pillars are intrinsically linked, meaning that any attempt to address one, must take into account the implications for the other two. This article attempts to address all three of these pillars. © 2015 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.

Blyth W.,Oxford Energy Associates | Blyth W.,London Business School | Blyth W.,The Royal Institute of International Affairs | Bunn D.,London Business School
Energy Policy | Year: 2011

Within the EU, there have been calls for governments to provide greater certainty over carbon prices, even though it is evident that their price risk is not entirely due to policy uncertainty. We develop a stochastic simulation model of price formation in the EU ETS to analyse the coevolution of policy, market and technology risks under different initiatives. The current situation of a weak (20%) overall abatement target motivates various technology-support interventions, elevating policy uncertainty as the major source of carbon price risk. In contrast, taking a firm decision to move to a more stringent 30% cap would leave the EU-ETS price formation driven much more by market forces than by policy risks. This leads to considerations of how much risk mitigation by governments would be appropriate, and how much should be taken as business risk by the market participants. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd.

Gross R.,Imperial College London | Blyth W.,The Royal Institute of International Affairs | Heptonstall P.,Imperial College London
Energy Economics | Year: 2010

Energy policy goals frequently depend upon investment in particular technologies, or categories of technology. Whilst the British government has often espoused the virtues of technological neutrality, UK policies now seek to promote nuclear power, coal with CO2 capture and storage, and renewable energy.Policy decisions are often informed by estimates of cost per unit of output (for example, £/MWh), also known as levelised costs. Estimates of these costs for different technologies are often used to provide a 'ballpark' guide to the levels of financial support needed (if any) to encourage uptake, or direct investment away from the technologies the market might otherwise have chosen. Levelised cost estimates can also help to indicate the cost of meeting public policy objectives, and whether there is a rationale for intervention (for example, based on net welfare gains).In the UK electricity sector, investment is undertaken by private companies, not governments. Investment is driven by expected returns, in the light of a range of risks related to both costs and revenues. Revenue risks are not captured in estimates of cost or cost-related risks. An important category of revenue risk is associated with electricity price fluctuations. Exposure to price risks differs by technology. Low electricity prices represent a revenue risk to technologies that cannot influence electricity prices. By contrast, 'price makers' that set marginal prices are, to an extent, able to pass fuel price increases through to consumers. They have an inherent 'hedge' against fuel and electricity price fluctuations.Based on recent research by the UK Energy Research Centre, this paper considers the implications of such price risks for policy design. The authors contrast the range of levelised costs estimated for different generating options with the spread of returns each is exposed to when electricity price fluctuations are factored in. Drawing on recent policy experiences in the renewable energy arena, in the UK and elsewhere, the authors provide an assessment of investment risk in policy effectiveness and consider how policy design can increase or ameliorate price risk. They discuss the circumstances under which policy goals might be best served by 'socialising' price risk, through fixed price policies. The importance of increased and explicit attention to revenue risk in policymaking is discussed, along with the means by which this might be achieved. © 2009 Elsevier B.V.

Agency: Cordis | Branch: FP7 | Program: CP-FP | Phase: SEC-2013.4.3-1 | Award Amount: 4.08M | Year: 2014

The CAERUS consortium aims to identify humanitarian relief actions that pave the way for human development and stability in post-conflict societies. Why have some countries successfully escaped the cycle of violence and conflict where others seem to be trapped? What has been the specific role of national, international and particularly European post-conflict relief action and development cooperation in these cases? This project will undertake humanitarian policy analysis on a global and regional scale, examining ways in which these policies support or undermine development and international security. It will also implement population-based studies in key crises-affected areas to obtain field evidence. Research will focus on health and educational policies. Many crises and conflicts entail a substantial degradation in human and social capital, creating barriers to post-conflict recovery and stabilization. The instant re-establishment of access to primary and secondary education, as well as to basic health services, is vital as these are tangible peace dividends. Offering young people real opportunities aside from warfare, and lowering the burden of disease and mortality in war-torn populations dries up the breeding ground of violence and conflict. Moreover, it potentially lowers migratory pressure towards the European Union from post-conflict societies. In addition, the CAERUS project seeks to detect barriers to provision of basic services in post-conflict settings. It will also assess how European technologies, especially field telecommunications and mobile laboratory capacities, can be used to increase timeliness and effectiveness of service provision in remote areas. These activities will, at the same time, increase European capacities to respond to outbreaks of rare and emerging diseases with pandemic potential. The consortium involves partners from Belgium, Norway, the Netherlands, Austria, United Kingdom and India.

Discover hidden collaborations