You are here
European Parliamentary Research Service Blog
European Parliamentary Research Service Blog
Updated: 2 months 3 weeks ago
Urban farming: A gateway to greater food security?
Written by Eamonn Noonan with Marie-Sophie A. Barreau.
SummaryThis foresight analysis identifies trends, uncertainties and potential disruptions around urban farming. Access to investment funding, careful risk management and a supportive regulatory and policy environment are critical to future development, especially at local or sub-national level.
BackgroundThe Parc des Expositions in Paris hosts the largest rooftop farm in Europe, spreading across 14 000 square metres. This project is one of the many urban agriculture initiatives that have developed across the globe in recent years, in an attempt to provide a more sustainable, healthier, and circular alternative to modern food supply chains.
‘Urban farming’ is the practice of agriculture within cities and their immediate vicinity. Anchored in the urban ecosystem, it produces primarily for local consumption. The practice has a long history, dating back to Mesopotamia in 4000 BCE. In modern times, urban farming has resurfaced during crises, as with ‘Dig for Victory’ campaigns during the Second World War. Urban farms come in various forms, including vertical farming (also known as ‘plant factories’) and rooftop farming. They embrace several technological innovations, such as hydroponics, aquaponics, and LED lighting. Often profit-driven, urban farms usually operate on a smaller scale than modern industrial farms. A difference from urban gardening (e.g. community gardens) is that urban farms combine economic interests with societal benefits. Studies suggest urban farming may account for 1-5 % of annual global food production.
Distinguishing features of urban farming include innovation, resource efficiency, health and social benefits, circularity, biodiversity preservation, and a local production chain. These tie into several United Nations(UN) Sustainable Development Goals, in particular climate action, sustainable cities, and health and wellbeing. Urban farms could offer the prospect of healthier and greener cities in advanced economies. In spite of the challenges facing their development, they may also have the potential to increase the EU’s strategic autonomy and enhance food security.
Main trendsIn 2030, the world’s population will rise to 8.6 billion. By 2050, it will reach 9 billion, with two-thirds living in cities. This suggests a need to increase global food production by more than 50 % – when arable land capacity is unlikely to increase by more than 12 %. Moreover, land-competition from urbanisation means that agricultural land is shrinking, especially in peri-urban areas. How will future food demand be met?
Climate change and the side effects of certain agricultural practices create interlinked challenges: rising temperatures, extreme weather conditions, diminishing resources, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and pollution from pesticides. According to the World Bank, agriculture uses 70 % of the world’s freshwater, and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization reports that it accounted for 37 % of the total land area in 2017. Food production is responsible for around one quarter of greenhouse gas emissions. All this poses challenges for the long-term viability of global food systems.
Food and drink-related scandals have multiplied. In Asia alone, media reported 400 food and drinks scandals in 2016 and 2017. Examples include the melamine milk scandal in China in 2008 and the Fipronil case in 2017, which affected both Europe and Asia. As a result, citizens have become more aware – and more sceptical – about food safety. The 2019 EFSA Special Barometer Report on EU food safety suggests that 43 % of EU citizens believe food is full of harmful substances, and for one in five Europeans, food safety was their main concern when buying products. A 2019 Market Brief from the European Commission identifies health concerns as a main driver for organic product consumption in the EU. Demand has steadily increased since 2010; the EU has become the world’s second biggest consumer of organic products, with retail sales of €34.3 billion in 2017.
Technological innovation and artificial intelligence are changing the way crops are cultivated. New forms of agriculture are challenging conventional practices, embracing (bio)technology for greater resource efficiency. Key innovations include sensor technology, crop tracking, and light-emitting diode (LED) grow lights.
Key uncertaintiesHope or hype? Urban farming has the potential to offer sustainable, high-tech, and knowledge-based agriculture. Factors such as the level of public and private investment will have an impact on the progress of an activity still in its infancy. Several parameters affect project viability: set-up costs, farmers’ skill set, availability of qualified labour, and access to and affordability of urban spaces. Not all of the technologies associated with urban farming have matured, and the diversity of the crops grown can be limited. In such circumstances, investment in research and development, and subsidies can be decisive in becoming competitive. This in turn raises questions about sustainability and circularity: the resource efficiency of some practices could be improved, and urban waste is a complex issue.
Social impacts? 68 % of the global population will live in cities by 2050, so competition for space will increase. Currently, most urban farming projects need large surfaces and are located on the outskirts of cities, in former industrial zones or abandoned warehouses. Gentrification of such spaces, driven by housing needs, may create land-use conflicts between urban farms and inhabitants. Lower-income citizens are more vulnerable and more at risk of being displaced. Government measures will influence who gains and who loses from such conflicts. The implications for rural areas, in particular for smallholder farms, also need consideration. On the one hand, urban farms could help redefine the traditional urban-rural divide; on the other, they could disrupt small farms, introducing tensions and competition for resources.
Will international crises stimulate urban farming? The Covid‑19 pandemic has highlighted the fragilities of international food supply chains. Current food security strategies rely heavily on imports and trade agreements. In 2019, the EU imported agrifood worth €119.3 billion. The USA, Brazil, Ukraine, and China accounted for 30 % of this. Similarly, China imported 98.5 million tons of soybean between 2019 and 2020, mostly from Brazil and the USA. In times of conflict and political tension, urban farming could reduce dependence on international supply chains and thus enhance food security.
Possible disruptionsPossible health and environmental hazards due to polluted air, water, and soil need to be taken seriously. Crops are exposed to urban soil and air pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, man-made chemicals). The use of pesticides and urban organic waste or wastewater in urban farming carries risks of unintentional exposure to harmful chemicals and pathogens, potentially threatening the health of workers, citizens, and the surrounding ecosystem. Large-scale contamination and sanitary scandals would quickly increase distrust among both citizens and investors. Logistics need careful attention, and well-designed risk management strategies need rigorous implementation. As many urban farming operations are modest scale start-ups, the creation of advisory services and funding incentives becomes especially important.
Regulatory frameworks have a key role in determining the future of urban farming. At the EU level, there is limited coordination across the different policies regarding urban agriculture. The Common Agricultural Policy neither specifically addresses nor allocates specific funds to urban farming. Nonetheless, European networks and research projects have developed to support and increase knowledge of urban farming: examples include the proGlreg and EFUA projects funded under Horizon 2020 and the Milan Urban Food Policy Pact. The EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy has also identified urban food systems as a key area for research and innovation, as part of the Horizon Europe framework.
Competitiveness remains a primary challenge. This involves both lower prices and greater citizen awareness and acceptance. Urban farming faces several obstacles; if it overcomes them, it could realise its potential to address the food needs of urban areas.
Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘Urban farming: A gateway to greater food security?‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Plenary round-up – October II 2021
Written by Katarzyna Sochacka and Clare Ferguson.
During the October II 2021 plenary session in Strasbourg, Parliament held a number of important debates, in particular on: the primacy of EU law, the rule of law crisis and de facto abortion ban in Poland; increased efforts to fight money laundering; regarding pushbacks at the EU’s external border; the right to a healthy environment and on climate, energy and environmental State aid guidelines (CEEAG). Members debated the rise of right-wing extremism and racism in Europe, the humanitarian situation in Haiti and the proposal to build a ‘single market for philanthropy’. Members debated a statement from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell, on the situation in Tunisia.
Parliament also discussed matters in preparation for the European Council meeting of 21‑22 October 2021, and debated the global tax agreements to be endorsed at the G20 Summit in Rome on 30‑31 October 2021, as well as the outcome of the Western Balkans summit.
Parliament announced that its 2021 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought will be awarded to Russian anti-corruption activist Alexei Navalny, with the formal ceremony to be held on 20 December 2021.
General budget of the European Union for the 2022 financial yearMembers voted to amend the Council’s position on the 2022 EU budget, the second annual budget under the 2021‑2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF). Parliament’s Committee on Budgets (BUDG) proposed to reverse the cuts sought by the Council, in favour of a considerable increase in contributions to the Covid‑19 recovery. The BUDG committee proposed greater spending on boosting investment, tackling unemployment, and laying the foundations for a more resilient and sustainable Union. As Parliament approved the BUDG committee position, the file now goes to the Conciliation Committee, bringing together Parliament and Council delegations, for consideration within a period of 21 days.
United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow (COP26)Despite the extreme weather conditions experienced during the past two years, the Covid‑19 pandemic appears to have diverted governments’ attention somewhat from the robust and urgent action needed to follow up on their Paris Agreement commitments. Developed nations have not yet honoured their promises to deliver funding by 2020 to assist less-developed countries’ efforts. With COP26 fast approaching, Members adopted a resolution tabled by Parliament’s Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), calling for stricter rules on voluntary cooperation to reach mitigation goals under Article 6 of the Agreement. Parliament also urges that Europe show greater climate leadership on the green global recovery and climate policies that align with the just transition principle. While underlining the need to end fossil fuel subsidies, the resolution also notes the urgency of tackling other emissions.
Credit servicers and credit purchasersMembers adopted at first reading the provisional agreement reached in trilogue by Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) Committee negotiators on the proposed credit servicers and purchasers directive. With an eye to the possible economic consequences of the Covid‑19 crisis, this legislative proposal aims at safeguarding borrowers’ rights when their loans are sold on, while promoting a sound secondary market in non-performing loans.
Motor vehicle insuranceUnder EU legislation, our motor vehicle insurance covers us throughout the EU. Members debated and adopted at first reading an agreed text on the proposed revision of the Motor Insurance Directive. The revision aims at better protecting road traffic accident victims against those who drive without insurance. The agreement includes Parliament’s demands that motor insurance price comparison tools meet certain standards and that they are certified by Member States, with possible fines for misleading consumers.
Farm to fork strategyMembers adopted an own-initiative resolution on the ‘farm to fork’ strategy by a large majority. Aimed at pushing the switch to sustainability in EU food systems, the Parliament’s ENVI and Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) Committees’ joint report welcomed the strategy, but urges greater action on balancing economic needs against sustainability criteria. The committees call for action across the spectrum of the food system, to support farmers and food producers alike in reducing their environmental impact. The report notes that EU countries’ strategic post-2022 common agricultural policy plans will be key to a successful transition to a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system.
Draft amending budget No 4/2021Members followed the BUDG committee’s recommendation that Parliament endorse the Council position on Draft amending budget No 4/2021. This amending budget updates the revenue side of the EU budget, now that the new system of own resources is in place, including a revised revenue forecast for the 2021 budget. The amendments also cover adjustments to the United Kingdom’s post-withdrawal contributions to the EU budget and certain EU countries’ reductions in annual contributions.
Discharge: EU general budget – Council and European CouncilParliament has exclusive competence to grant or refuse discharge for the execution of the EU budget and returned to the remaining discharge decisions for the 2019 financial year during this plenary. Members adopted a resolution refusing discharge for the 2019 budget of the European Council and Council (postponed since April 2021), following a recommendation by the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT). The CONT committee regrets that the Council’s continued refusal to cooperate demonstrates a lack of respect for Parliament’s role as guarantor of the democratic accountability of EU institutions’ spending.
Discharge: European Border and Coast GuardThe second debate and vote on discharge concerned the 2019 budget discharge for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Members adopted the CONT committee’s report recommending Parliament grant discharge (also postponed since April 2021). The committee recommended freezing part of the Agency’s budget, pending improvement in its operations, human resources and financial management.
EU-Taiwan political relations and cooperationMembers debated and adopted a draft recommendation to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President on EU-Taiwan political relations and cooperation. The Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) report accompanying the draft recommendation calls for an enhanced partnership, a stronger bilateral investment agreement, supports Taiwan’s efforts to gain a seat at the international table, and expresses concern regarding the Chinese position.
Protecting workers from asbestosMembers debated a Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) legislative-initiative report and adopted recommendations to the Commission on protecting workers from asbestos, by an overwhelming majority The committee calls for a ‘European strategy for the removal of all asbestos’, a substance which causes cancer, killing 30 000 to 90 000 people in the EU every year. Given the persistence of asbestos in buildings in the EU and the need to update exposure limits, the EMPL committee proposes to connect policies to remove asbestos and to strengthen worker protection and support for victims.
Opening of trilogue negotiationsMembers confirmed, without a vote, six mandates for negotiation: from the Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE), Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO), Civil Liberties, Justice & Home Affairs (LIBE) and AGRI (2 mandates) Committees, and from the Legal Affairs (JURI) and (LIBE) Committees jointly (Rule 58).
A further two mandates from the LIBE committee were also confirmed by vote.
Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘Plenary round-up – October II 2021‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Exploring gender equality across policy areas
Written by Rosamund Shreeves.
The European Union has adopted gender mainstreaming as its official approach to gender equality, alongside targeted action to eliminate discrimination and advance women’s empowerment. From 25 to 28 October 2021, the European Parliament’s committees and delegations are holding a series of events aimed at highlighting the importance of gender equality and gender mainstreaming across different policy domains.
The concept and implementation of gender mainstreamingGender mainstreaming is not a policy goal in itself but a tool to advance gender equality by ensuring that all legislation, policies and funding programmes make a positive contribution to equality, and consider impacts on women and men that may inadvertently cause or perpetuate inequality. A gender dimension may be more immediately evident in some areas than others, but no intervention can be assumed to be gender neutral. Consequently, a range of methods including gender statistics, analysis, impact assessment, budgeting, evaluation and audits have been developed to put gender mainstreaming into practice. This should result in better legislation and policy, and more gender-equal organisations.
The EU’s approach to gender mainstreamingAs defined by the European Commission in 1996, gender mainstreaming means ‘not restricting efforts to promote equality to the implementation of specific measures to help women, but mobilising all general policies and measures specifically for the purpose of achieving equality’. It was adopted as the official policy approach in the European Union and its Member States in the Amsterdam Treaty (1997), and the legal basis was strengthened in Article 8 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which commits both to eliminate inequalities and to promote the principle of equality between women and men in all their actions. The specific priorities in the current EU gender-equality strategy 2020-2025 include: taking account of the gender dimension in major climate change and digitalisation initiatives and in specific sectors such as transport, energy and agriculture; introducing an intersectional approach across EU policies; and ensuring dedicated funding for a gender equal future. The European Parliament’s own gender-mainstreaming policy, formally launched in 2003, has evolved considerably over time. The new gender action plan adopted in July 2020, and the roadmap for its implementation adopted in April 2021, include a range of measures aimed at ensuring that Parliament becomes fully gender sensitive, with regard to its legislative activity, gender balance and culture. One specific objective is to strengthen the Gender Mainstreaming Network, which helps to bring a gender dimension into the work of committees and delegations.
Gender Equality Week in the European ParliamentParliament’s Gender Equality Week is a relatively new initiative, first held in 2020. Spearheaded by the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM), it complements the longstanding stocktaking held around International Women’s Day on 8 March, by giving all committees and delegations a further opportunity to explore issues relevant to gender equality in their particular areas of competence. This year’s programme spans a broad spectrum of policy areas and sectors. As in 2020, the gendered impacts of the coronavirus pandemic will be a key focus, exploring how recovery measures, including EU funding and national recovery plans, can promote gender equality and prevent the widening of existing gender gaps. When it comes to long-term challenges, there will also be discussions around how to ensure that both women and men benefit from investment in the digital and green transitions and on the potential benefits of EU action for carers and the care sector. Gender issues in specific sectors including fisheries, agriculture, research, energy, culture, education, and tourism will be another focus, as will humanitarian action, foreign and security policy and the situation of women in several countries outside the EU, including Turkey and Afghanistan. Violence against women will also be addressed. The week will offer an opportunity to review progress on equality legislation and present the latest results of the EIGE Gender Equality Index, the EU’s main tool for measuring advances in gender equality in the EU over time.
Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘Exploring gender equality across policy areas‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
For more background information and analysis, see our topical digest on gender equality, prepared for European Gender Equality Week.
You can follow the events via webstreaming and Twitter: #EPGenderEqualityWeek.
Read also:’Women in fisheries’, blogpost by Frederik Scholaert; EPRS video and Topical digest on women in fisheries
Categories: European Union
EU energy system transformation – Cost of Non-Europe
Written by Aleksandra Heflich and Jerôme Leon Saulnier.
The move towards more harmonised European Union (EU) energy policies has always been at the heart of the European project, as large savings from collective action could be expected in this area. As a result, a more integrated EU internal energy market has gradually emerged as a reality, although much more needs to be done to arrive at a more efficient organisation and to ensure further beneficial convergence. Facing and understanding the ongoing climate crisis, the EU has also been at the forefront of combining energy and climate policies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions following its international commitments under the Kyoto Protocol. After over a decade of pursuing ambitious climate and energy policies, the EU has already achieved some progress such as producing 20 % of energy from renewable energy sources, improving its energy efficiency and effectively reducing GHG emissions from sectors under the EU emission trading system. In 2021, the EU stepped up its ambition with proposals for a new set of actions across all sectors to set the right trajectory for the EU economy to efficiently achieve climate neutrality by 2050. Most importantly, this objective is underpinned by a landmark, legally binding European Climate Law that makes the EU one of few main global emitters to have made such a strong binding commitment to achieving climate neutrality by mid-century.
There are many challenges ahead on the road to a zero net-emitting EU energy system by 2050 (see Chapter 2). How successful the EU is in decarbonising its energy industries, that are still responsible for 80 % of EU GHG emissions, will be key for the overall success of the European green transformation and the climate neutrality of the EU economy in a broader sense. Action taken on decarbonising the EU energy system in the coming years will determine not only the potential net monetary impacts and successes of achieving the final environmental target of net zero emissions in 2050 but also whether the transformation is just and fair to all and contributing to achieving a sustainable and prosperous society boasting a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy.
More specifically, the present report, drafted at the request of the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE), looks at the EU objective of achieving the decarbonisation of its energy system by 2050 from a perspective of what would happen without ambitious and united EU action in this area. It aims to establish what the cost of non-Europe would be if the EU does not step up its efforts towards achieving energy transformation. It estimates the potential environmental, social and macro-economic consequences in a decade (2030), and three decades (2050), from now. At the same time, the report presents quantifications of the potential beneficial role that the EU could play if common budgetary, coordination and regulatory actions are stepped up until 2050. The report also reviews progress made over recent years as well as analysing future opportunities for boosting the energy industries’ effective actions in the context of the EU economic recovery, and the investments necessary to achieve net-zero emissions for the energy system in 2050.
The underpinning study in Annex II as well as the complementary quantitative estimations and analysis done in this report (see Chapter 3) indicate that many of the key challenges associated with the transformation of the EU energy systemcould be difficult to overcome efficiently and effectively if no further common and determined EU action is taken. Ensuring rapid development and deployment of the green technologies needed for decarbonising energy use in sectors that are difficult to decarbonise, while also reinforcing EU global competitiveness and leadership in some of these technologies, would also be achieved more rapidly and efficiently if done in a concerted way. Moreover, some society- and policy-related challenges, such as ensuring an appropriate non-distortive EU carbon price signal is sent to the internal market, are more effectively addressed at the EU level. At the same time, the distributional effects of this pricing could be addressed at the EU level so that the transformation ensures continued convergence and strengthens EU social and economic cohesion, while being fair and inclusive. Finally, given the constraints placed on public finances as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, the appropriate levels of financing dedicated to energy transformation could also be allocated at EU level, thus reinforcing the Member States’ national budgetary spending.
Read the complete study on ‘EU energy system transformation – Cost of Non-Europe‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
- Evolution of prices and convergence in the gas sector (2012-2020)
- Evolution of prices and convergence in the gas sector (2012-2020)
- EU-led sustainable investment plan
- Environmental costs of a lack of ambitious and united EU action (2020-2100)
- Potential adverse environmental impact of complacency and fragmentation
- Historical and projected EU27 net installed electricity production capacity by source (MIX55 scenario)
Categories: European Union
Outlook for the European Council meeting of 21-22 October 2021
Written by Ralf Drachenberg and Rebecca Torpey.
The regular European Council meeting of 21-22 October 2021 will discuss the coronavirus pandemic, digital policy, migration, energy prices and external relations. Regarding the coronavirus pandemic, EU Heads of State or Government will focus on EU coordination, resilience and readiness in terms of health crises and the EU’s future preparedness for the short and medium terms.
The discussions at the meeting on both digital policy and on migration are expected to be stock-taking exercises, assessing the implementation of previous European Council decisions and possibly adding further specifications to them. If the update of the Schengen Borders Code were to be addressed in the context of migration, this could generate a strong debate, since despite overall support for strong external EU borders, Member States have diverging views on how border protection should be assured. EU leaders could also debate energy prices at length, as the issue has become high profile in many Member States. Regarding external relations, discussions in the European Council will focus on preparations for forthcoming international events, notably the ASEM and the Eastern Partnership summits, and the COP26 climate conference. In addition, the Presidents of the European Council, Charles Michel, and the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, may brief EU Heads of State or Government on the recent EU-Ukraine Summit, held on 12 October 2021.
1. European Council agenda pointsMost of the topics due to be discussed at this European Council meeting have been known for some time. Migration and energy prices have been added more recently.
The indicative Leaders’ Agenda 2021-22, adopted in June 2021, had already outlined a number of topics for the formal October meeting: coronavirus, digital, and preparations for the ASEM and Eastern Partnership Summits would all be on the agenda. While the European Council’s President, Charles Michel, continues to use the Leaders’ Agenda as a work-plan for the European Council to schedule meetings and their respective topics, he has dropped other elements of the original Leaders’ Agenda methodology, notably the holding of preparatory ‘leaders’ meetings’, accompanied by ‘leaders’ notes’, which were designed to engage ‘more directly on politically sensitive issues’.
A topic that is not formally on the agenda but could be addressed by EU leaders is the recent ruling of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, stating that some parts of the EU Treaties are incompatible with the Polish Constitution, and its possible implications for the EU’s legal framework.
This will be the first European Council meeting for the new Chancellor of Austria, Alexander Schallenberg, as well as the expected last formal European Council meeting for the Swedish Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, who has announced he will step down in early November 2021.
2. European Council meeting Coronavirus pandemicIn a context of newly rising infection rates from the coronavirus (Delta variant) in certain central and eastern European Member States, the pandemic will be discussed by the European Council for the 19th time at this meeting. EU leaders will take stock of the Covid-19 situation across the EU and continue their discussion on future preparedness. In the coronavirus context, the European Council will also address international solidarity and global governance in the health field.
The coronavirus pandemic in EuropeEU leaders are expected to welcome the fact that the EU was able to reach its target of fully vaccinating 70 % of adults by the end of the summer and the subsequent removal of many restrictions. However, the overall rate of vaccination in the EU does hide big disparities between countries, despite vaccine doses being provided on a pro rata basis, as agreed by the European Council. Whilst in Denmark 95.2 % and in Ireland 91.5 % of the adult population are fully vaccinated, the share is only 23.2 % in Bulgaria and 34.1 % in Romania. This could generate discussion on differences in vaccine strategies and on the lessons to be learnt for the future.
Following the EU leaders’ discussion on future preparedness at their June 2021 meeting, the European Council is expected to address a number of aspects related to EU coordination, resilience and readiness in terms of health crises. EU leaders will most likely highlight successful aspects of EU coordination during the pandemic, such as vaccine procurement and the speedy introduction of the EU Digital Covid Certificate. The focus may then shift towards short- and medium-term future preparedness. In this context the European Council is expected to invite the co-legislators to conclude the Health Union legislative package, call for the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA) to be made operational quickly, and for work to be taken forward on the draft Council Regulation on a framework of EU-level measures in the event of a public health emergency.
The coronavirus pandemic and the rest of the worldThe European Council is expected to reiterate its previous position and signal its support for international vaccine solidarity, highlighting the donation of vaccines by Member States, the financial support provided by the EU to initiatives such as COVAX, the importance of vaccine production in the EU, and support for the development of vaccine production facilities in Africa.
At their June 2021 meeting, EU leaders welcomed the organisation of a special session of the World Health Assembly to discuss a new international treaty on pandemics. This session is due to take place in November 2021; it is therefore expected that EU leaders will use their final meeting ahead of that special session to reiterate their support for the role of the World Health Organization in global health governance and for an international treaty on pandemics.
Energy pricesThe recent quadrupling of gas prices and the near doubling of energy prices led EU leaders to request an in-depth debate on energy prices, a first since October 2014. A brief discussion took place during the informal dinner of Heads of State or Government held in Brdo pri Kranju, Slovenia, on 5 October 2021. In a common statement, five Member States – Czechia, France, Greece, Romania and Spain – denounced the rise in prices and called for a common European approach, which should explore, inter alia, ‘common guidelines on gas storage’ and better correlation between ‘the price paid by the consumers, and the average production cost of electricity in national production mixes’. The European Commission has presented a communication on energy prices, which will provide a basis for this debate.
Digital policyThe European Council is expected once again to take stock of the EU’s digital transition, and follow up on the debate held at the 25-26 March 2021 meeting. The regularity with which digital issues are on the agenda of European Council meetings shows not only the salience of establishing and maintaining Europe’s digital sovereignty in an increasingly competitive global landscape, but also the role digitalisation plays in the recovery, growth, prosperity and competitiveness of the bloc. In this context, Heads of State or Government are likely to discuss the Commission’s recently adopted Digital Compass, as well as ongoing legislative files and the EU’s global aspirations in the field.
Digital CompassThe Digital Compass, proposed by the Commission on 9 March 2021, aims at translating the EU’s digital ambitions for 2030 into concrete targets for skills and infrastructure as well as regarding the transformation of businesses and public services. The European Council might explicitly endorse these targets during its forthcoming meeting.
Legislative prioritiesThe European Council is expected to take stock of the current legislative proposals and other initiatives in the pipeline. Among these files, there are in particular the Digital Services Act (DSA), the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, and the European Digital Identity Regulation, all currently under discussion between the co-legislators. As these files are crucial for the digital transformation of the economy and society, EU Heads of State or Government may encourage the co-legislators to reach agreement rapidly.
Global digital prioritiesEU leaders may re-iterate their encouragement for the EU as well as the Member States to strengthen their efforts – both bilaterally and in the framework of multilateral fora – to promote EU digital standards and contribute to developing global digital norms. Work has already started with the United States (US) in the context of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC), which met on 28-29 September, where the EU and US reaffirmed their commitment to cooperate on key global technology issues and to base these policies on shared democratic values. Another important event was the ground-breaking global tax deal finalised in the OECD on 8 October 2021, which in the end included all EU Member States. It sets a minimum corporate tax rate of 15 % from 2023 and will ensure that multinationals, including large digital companies, are taxed where they operate and create profit; a development which was welcomed by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
MigrationEU Heads of State or Government are expected to return to the issue of migration. As at the previous European Council meeting where migration was discussed, the debate is likely to focus solely on the external dimension of migration – and not to address the outstanding decisions on the asylum package. EU leaders will in particular assess the implementation of their conclusions of 24 June 2021, and notably progress on their commitment to intensify ‘mutually beneficial partnerships and cooperation with countries of origin and transit’. They will also evaluate action aimed at tackling the root causes of migration, and eradicating smuggling and trafficking, as well as measures designed to reinforce border controls, address legal migration and ensure return and readmission. Likewise, the conclusions underlined the need for close cooperation with the UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration. Specific commitments were that
In the context of external migration, EU Heads of State or Government might also touch upon the protection of the EU’s external borders, notably on the forthcoming Commission proposal for an update of the Schengen Borders Code, expected in November 2021
On that topic, on 7 October 2021, interior ministers from 12 Member States sent a letter to Margaritis Schinas, Vice-President of the European Commission, and Ylva Johansson, Commissioner for Home Affairs, asking ‘to adapt the existing legal framework to the new realities’. They notably suggested that ‘a physical barrier appears to be an effective border protection measure’ and proposed that measures in this regard should be ‘additionally and adequately funded from the EU budget as a matter of priority’.
Under the Leaders’ Agenda for 2020-21, the 24-25 June 2021 European Council meeting was supposed to discuss the future of Schengen, however the topic was taken off the agenda. As flagged in the EPRS outcome briefing, EU leaders agreed at the informal European Council meeting of 5 October 2021 to discuss the issue of the border-free Schengen area in more detail after the European Commission has presented its proposals – due in November 2021.
External relationsEU leaders are expected to take stock of the preparations for the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) and the Eastern Partnership summit. The ASEM summit, scheduled for 25-26 November 2021, is aimed at fostering political dialogue between Europe and Asia. Green recovery is likely to feature among the main topics for discussion as indicated by the recently published EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo-Pacific. On 15 December 2021, the Eastern Partnership summit will focus on future cooperation priorities, drawing on the new vision for ‘recovery, resilience and reform’ presented by the European Commission and the High Representative, Josep Borrell, in July 2021.
EU leaders will use their October meeting to focus on climate diplomacy and prepare for the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) to be held in Glasgow, UK, from 31 October to 12 November 2021. On 6 October 2021, the Council set its position for COP26, stressing the urgency of ‘stepping up global climate action’ and of addressing ‘the climate emergency’, whilst inviting all parties ‘to come forward with ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions’. EU leaders might also take stock of the outcome of the UN Biodiversity Conference (COP15) held in Kunming, China, from 11 to 15 October 2021.
Read this briefing on ‘Outlook for the European Council meeting of 21-22 October 2021‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Conference on the Future of Europe: Education, Culture, Youth and Sport
Written by Lena Hirschenberger.
Animated infographic: Lifelong Learning
last updated: January 2021
European Heritage Days – Women’s contribution
‘At a glance’ note by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, September 2021, 1 page.
Erasmus 2021-2027: The Union programme for education, training, youth and sport
Briefing by Denise Chircop, July 2021, 11 pages.
Erasmus+ 2021-2027
‘At a glance’ note by Denise Chircop, May 2021, 1 page.
Lowering hurdles to sport for persons with disabilities
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, May 2021, 1 page.
European Solidarity Corps 2021-2027
‘At a glance’ note by Denise Chircop, May 2021, 1 page.
Creative Europe programme 2021-2027
‘At a glance’ note by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, May 2021, 2 pages.
Getting to know the EU’s cultural heritage sites
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, April 2021, 1 page.
Digital cultural diversity
Briefing by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, April 2021, 12 pages.
Books and book lovers in the EU
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, April 2021, 1 page.
Early leavers from education and training
Briefing by Denise Chircop and Eulalia Claros, March 2021, 4 pages.
Women in arts and culture − Artists, not muses
‘At a glance’ note by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, March 2021, 2 pages.
EU Prize for Contemporary Architecture / Mies van der Rohe Award: A tribute to Bauhaus
‘At a glance’ note by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, February 2021, 2 pages.
LUX Prize 2.0: Pan-European Audience Film Award
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, November 2020, 2 pages.
The future of tertiary education in Europe
In-Depth Analysis by Costica Dumbrava, Cemal Karakas, Monika Kiss, and Marcin Szczepański, September 2020, 36 pages.
A European week of sport… like no other
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, September 2020, 2 pages.
European Day of Languages: Digital survival of lesser-used languages
Briefing by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, September 2020, 9 pages.
Education in isolation in the pandemic, following the path of Isaac Newton
Briefing by Denise Chircop, June 2020, 12 pages.
Digital culture − Access issues
Briefing by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, June 2020, 12 pages.
Performing arts: Emerging from confinement
‘At a glance’ note by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass, June 2020, 2 pages.
Women in films: Still fighting the celluloid ceiling
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, March 2020, 2 pages.
Gender equality in sports: (slowly) changing the game
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, March 2020, 2 pages.
European education area
‘At a glance’ note by Denise Chircop, March 2020, 2 pages.
Education and the New European Bauhaus
‘At a glance’ note by Denise Chircop, March 2020, 2 pages.
Teaching: A woman’s world
‘At a glance’ note by Ivana Katsarova, February 2020, 2 pages.
Lifelong Learning
March 2021
Categories: European Union
Conference on the Future of Europe: A stronger economy, social justice and jobs
Written by Lena Hirschenberger.
Recovery plan for Europe: state of play
Briefing by Magdalena Sapala, EPRS, June 2021
Animated infographic: Just Transition Fund
Last updated: October 2021
The European Pillar of Social Rights: Gothenburg, Porto and beyond
Briefing by Nora Milotay, EPRS, May 2021
Cohesion, resilience and values. Heading 2 of the 2021-2027 MFF
Briefing by Magdalena Sapala, EPRS, April 2021
The future of work: trends, challenges and potential initiatives
Briefing by Monika Kiss, EPRS Ideas Papers, February 2021
Green and sustainable finance
Briefing by Stefano Spinaci, EPRS, February 2021
Towards a more resilient Europe post-coronavirus: Options to enhance the EUs’ resilience to structural risks
Study by Étienne Bassot, Franck Debié, Stanislas de Finance and Astrid Worum, EPRS, April 2021
Covid 19: The need for a gendered response
Briefing by Rosamund Shreeves, EPRS, February 2021
Digital automation and the future of work
Study by David Spencer, Matt Cole, Simon Joyce, Xanthe Whittaker and Mark Stuart, EPRS-STOA, January 2021
The right to disconnect
Plenary at a glance by Nora Milotay, January 2021
Next generation or lost generation. Children, young people and the pandemic
Briefing by Nora Milotay, EPRS, December 2020
Data subjects, digital surveillance, AI and the future of work
Study by Phoebe V. Moore, EPRS -STOA, December 2020
What future for the social economy?
Briefing by Nora Milotay, EPRS, November 2020
Recent trends in female employment
Briefing by Monika Kiss, EPRS, October 2020
Improving the quality of public spending in Europe
Study by Jerome Leon Saulnier, EPRS -EAVA, October 2020
Social and employment policies in Europe
Briefing by Nora Milotay, EPRS Ideas Papers, September 2020
Social governance in the EU: Managing complex systems
In-depth analysis by Nora Milotay , EPRS, May 2020
The impact of the free movement of economically active citizens within the EU
Briefing by Klaus Mueller, EPRS -EAVA, December 2019
Women in EU fisheries
October 2021
Empowering migrants into the EU job market
August 2021
Évolution de la pauvreté dans l’Union européenne (FR)
March 2021
Covid-19 increases women’s unpaid care work
March 2021
Categories: European Union
Conference on the Future of Europe: Digital Transformation
Written by Lena Hirschenberger.
What if the Internet failed?
‘At a glance’ note by Lieve Van Woensel, September 2021, 2 pages.
What if deepfakes made us doubt everything we see and hear?
‘At a glance’ note by Philip Boucher, September 2021, 2 pages.
Regulating facial recognition in the EU
In-Depth Analysis by Tambiama André Madiega and Hendrik Mildebrath, September 2021, 38 pages.
Artificial intelligence in criminal law
‘At a glance’ note by Sofija Voronova, September 2021, 1 page.
EU cyber-defence capabilities
‘At a glance’ note by Tania Latici, September 2021, 2 pages.
The EU digital decade: A new set of digital targets for 2030
Briefing by Maria Del Mar Negreiro Achiaga, August 2021, 8 pages.
Initial appraisal of EC impact assessment – Artificial intelligence act
Briefing by Hubert Dalli, July 2021, 9 pages.
Artificial intelligence at EU borders: Overview of applications and key issues
In-Depth Analysis by Costica Dumbrava, July 2021, 32 pages.
Recent cyber-attacks and the EU’s cybersecurity strategy for the digital decade
‘At a glance’ note by Ann Neville, June 2021, 2 pages.
Data Governance Act
Briefing by Hendrik Mildebrath, June 2021, 12 pages.
Digital markets act
Briefing by Tambiama André Madiega, May 2021, 12 pages.
Digital Europe programme: Funding digital transformation beyond 2020
Briefing by Marcin Szczepański, May 2021, 10 pages.
The new European cybersecurity competence centre and network
Briefing by Mar Negreiro, May 2021, 12 pages.
Roaming Regulation review
Briefing by Mar Negreiro, May 2021, 10 pages.
A European strategy for data
‘At a glance’ note by Hendrik Mildebrath and Guillaume Ragonnaud, March 2021, 1 page.
Digital services act
Briefing by Tambiama André Madiega, March 2021, 12 pages.
Democratic scrutiny of social media platforms and protection of fundamental rights
‘At a glance’ note by Tambiama André Madiega, February 2021, 1 page.
The NIS2 Directive: A high common level of cybersecurity in the EU
Briefing by Mar Negreiro, February 2021, 11 pages.
Rethinking education in the digital age
Study coordinated by the EPRS STOA unit, January 2021, 64 pages.
Digital automation and the future of work
Study coordinated by the EPRS STOA unit, January 2021, 78 pages.
EU-USA: a transatlantic technology alliance
September 2021
Can we protect society from the deep-fake menance?
September 2021
The deepfake menance: a gendered issue
September 2021
What if objects around us flocked together and became intelligent?
July 2021
What is a smart village?
April 2021
Categories: European Union
The concept of ‘climate refugee’: Towards a possible definition
Written by Joanna Apap with Capucine du Perron de Revel.
According to statistics published by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, since 2008 over 318 million people around the world have been forcibly displaced by floods, windstorms, earthquakes or droughts, 30.7 million in 2020 alone. This is equivalent to one person being displaced every second. Depending on the frequency and scale of the major natural disasters occurring, there are significant fluctuations in the total number of displaced people from one year to the next, yet the trend over recent decades has been a growing one. Many find refuge within their own country, but some are forced to go abroad. In the summer of 2021, Europe witnessed heavy and unprecedented flooding, particularly in Belgium and Germany, and heat domes in the Mediterranean region. Scientists relate this directly to climate change. All things considered, the number of ‘climate refugees’ looks set to rise.
So far, the national and international response to this challenge has been limited, and protection for the people affected remains inadequate. What adds further to the gap in protection of such people – who are often described as ‘climate refugees’ – is that there is neither a clear definition of this category of people, nor are they covered by the 1951 Refugee Convention. The latter extends only to people who have a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion, and who are unable or unwilling to seek protection from their home countries. While the EU has not so far recognised climate refugees formally, it has expressed growing concern and has taken action to support the countries potentially affected by climate-related stress and help them develop resilience.
This briefing is an update of an earlier one from January 2019.
Read this briefing on ‘The concept of ‘climate refugee’: Towards a possible definition‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Union budget 2022
Written by Sidonia Mazur.
The European Parliament is one of the two arms of the budgetary authority of the European Union, the Council being the other. The two institutions, assisted by the European Commission, decide on the budget in the annual EU budgetary procedure, within the limits of the long-term EU budget (the multiannual financial framework (MFF)). The annual EU budget funds EU policies and programmes following the Union’s political priorities and legal obligations. The financial year starts on 1 January and ends on 31 December. The European Parliament amends the Council position on the draft budget proposed by the European Commission through the work of its Committee on Budgets (BUDG) and the specialised parliamentary committees.
During the October II plenary session, the Parliament is due to vote on amendments to the Council’s position on the draft EU budget for 2022. The 2022 budget is the second under the 2021‑2027 MFF. It is also the second year of the EU Recovery Instrument – Next Generation EU (NGEU) – planned to run for the years 2021 to 2023. The BUDG committee report reverses all the reductions to the Commission’s budget that were proposed by the Council. Furthermore, it proposes a considerable increase in 2022 budget contributions to Parliament’s priorities, in particular the recovery from the Covid‑19 crisis. The BUDG report sets the 2022 EU budget at €171.8 billion in commitments. For payments, it proposes almost €172.47 billion.
The report confirms the Parliament’s priorities with the overarching objective being support to Covid-19 recovery. The top priorities are: investment with a particular focus on SMEs, the green and digital transitions, giving fresh opportunities to young people and providing protection to children, and a strong European Health Union (including the COVAX programme). Finally yet importantly, the report underlines the priorities in the fields of security, migration, asylum and integration, fundamental rights and Union values. The committee restores appropriations to the level of the draft budget on all Commission lines subsequently cut by the Council.
The next step in the procedure will be the convening of the Conciliation Committee, bringing together Parliament and Council delegations. The 21‑day conciliation period will last until 15 November, with the first meeting scheduled for 28 October.
Further reading- For more information on Parliament’s reading of the EU 2022 budget see our at a glance note.
- For more on Parliament’s role in the EU annual budgetary procedure see: Annual EU budgetary procedure: An introduction to the steps in the EP
- For more on the MFF see our up to date blogpost or our interactive infographic.
- For more on the recovery plan for Europe see our briefing.
Categories: European Union
Looking to Glasgow: A scene-setter ahead of COP26
Written by Liselotte Jensen.
Adopted in 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has gathered the nations of the world with the common goal to limit dangerous global warming. In December 2021, after having been postponed for a year due to the coronavirus crisis, world leaders will meet in Glasgow for the 26th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP26) to continue negotiations on the implementation of the Paris Agreement.
The latest assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) underscores the of role human activities in causing global warming. The UNFCCC-commissioned IPCC special report on impacts of global warming of 1.5°C (SR1.5) also outlines the risks of current trajectories. There is therefore strong pressure on world leaders to deliver progress in Glasgow.
Parties to the Paris Agreement were required to update their nationally determined contributions to fight climate change and its impacts before COP26. Some Parties are yet to do so, while analysis of submitted contributions as of July 2021, shows action to reach the agreed targets remains insufficient. Most key emitting nations continue to rate poorly on their climate action performance.
While COP24 and COP25 both failed to finalise the Paris Agreement rulebook, and developed nations so far fall short of fulfilling their climate finance promises, expectations are mounting for Glasgow to finish the job. At the same time, Covid‑19 restrictions and impacts continue to create challenges to participate in person, especially for developing countries’ delegations.
Recent Eurobarometer surveys show citizens have a clear expectation that their governments should handle the climate change challenge, with research also pointing to a growing acceptance of the need to change personal habits in view of transitioning to more sustainable economies.
The European Parliament will vote on a motion for a resolution on COP26 at the October II plenary session in Strasbourg. The draft highlights the urgency of action and calls upon leaders to ensure a just transition and adequate support for areas and states vulnerable to climate change impacts.
Read this briefing on ‘Looking to Glasgow: A scene-setter ahead of COP26‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
European Parliament Plenary Session – October II 2021
Written by Clare Ferguson.
Following on swiftly from the October I plenary session, Members will meet in Strasbourg for the October II session, again in hybrid format, with a number of important files on the agenda.
Despite the extreme weather conditions experienced during the last two years, the Covid‑19 pandemic appears to have diverted governments’ attention somewhat from the robust and urgent action needed to follow up on their Paris Agreement commitments. Developed nations have not yet honoured their promises to deliver funding by 2020. With COP26 fast approaching, Members will vote on a motion for resolution, tabled by Parliament’s Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI), on Wednesday evening. The draft resolution calls for stricter rules on voluntary cooperation to reach mitigation goals under Article 6 of the Agreement. It also urges that Europe show greater climate leadership to ensure a green global recovery and climate policies that align with the just transition principle. While underlining the need to end fossil fuel subsidies, the resolution also notes the urgency of tackling transport, agriculture and methane emissions.
One initiative aimed at pushing the switch to sustainability in EU food systems, the ‘farm to fork’ strategy, is likely to see continued lively debate on Monday evening. Parliament’s ENVI and Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) Committees have tabled a joint own-initiative report that welcomes the strategy, but urges greater action on balancing economic needs against sustainability criteria. The committees call for action across the spectrum of the food system, to support farmers and food producers alike in reducing their environmental impact. The report notes that EU countries’ strategic post-2022 common agricultural policy plans will be key to a successful transition to a fair, healthy and environmentally friendly food system.
However, the main theme for this second session of October is the EU budget. Parliament’s reading of the 2022 EU budget is scheduled to take place on Tuesday afternoon, with Members deciding on amendments to the Council’s position on this second budget under the 2021‑2027 multiannual financial framework. The amendments proposed by the Committee on Budgets (BUDG) reverse the cuts proposed by the Council, and instead propose a considerable increase in contributions to the Covid‑19 recovery. The BUDG committee wishes to see greater allocation to boosting investment, tackling unemployment, and laying the foundations for a more resilient and sustainable Union. Once Parliament agrees its position, the file will go to a meeting of the Conciliation Committee, bringing together Parliament and Council delegations, for consideration. Members will also vote on a BUDG committee report recommending that Parliament endorse the Council position on Draft amending budget No 4/2021, on Tuesday lunchtime. This amending budget updates the revenue side of the EU budget, now that the new system of own resources is in place, including a revised revenue forecast for the 2021 budget. The amendments also cover adjustments to the United Kingdom’s post-withdrawal contributions to the EU budget and certain EU countries’ reductions in annual contributions.
Parliament has exclusive competence to grant or refuse discharge for the execution of the EU budget and returns to the remaining discharge decisions for the 2019 financial year, with a vote scheduled for Tuesday lunchtime on discharge for the 2019 budget of the European Council and Council (postponed since April 2021). Parliament has refused to grant discharge to the Council every financial year since 2009, and a Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) report recommends the same outcome in respect of the 2019 budget. The CONT committee regrets that the Council’s refusal to cooperate demonstrates a lack of respect for Parliament’s role as guarantor of the democratic accountability of EU institutions’ spending. The other file, scheduled for debate on Thursday morning, concerns the 2019 budget discharge for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Here, the CONT committee now recommends granting the discharge postponed in April 2021. The committee nevertheless makes a number of recommendations concerning the Agency’s operations: on the effectiveness of its primary operations at the external EU borders, including the respect of fundamental rights; and on its human resources and financial management in particular. For these reasons, the committee recommends freezing part of the Agency’s budget until 2022, pending improvement.
Turning to the money in our own pockets, Members will consider adoption at first reading of the agreed text on the proposed credit servicers directive, on Tuesday lunchtime. During the financial crisis, many people were unable to repay their loans, leading to banks accumulating unsustainable levels of unpaid loans (known as non-performing loans, or NPL) on their balance sheets – and loans being bought or passed on to credit servicers for, sometimes robust, collection. With an eye to the possible economic consequences of the coronavirus crisis, this legislative proposal aims at safeguarding borrowers’ rights, while also promoting a sound secondary market in NPLs. Parliament’s Economic & Monetary Affairs (ECON) Committee has ensured that the draft text protects consumers and small businesses who experience financial difficulties during this delicate period.
We’ve been able to drive wherever we like in the European Union since 2009, thanks to EU legislation that ensures that our motor vehicle insurance covers us throughout the EU. The time has now come for a revision of the directive, in particular to better protect road traffic accident victims against those who drive without insurance. On Thursday morning, Members will debate an agreed text on the proposed revision of the Motor Insurance Directive at first reading. The agreement includes Parliament’s demands that motor insurance price comparison tools meet certain standards and that they are certified by Member States, with possible fines for misleading consumers. It also excludes light electric and off-road vehicles. The European Commission will need to evaluate implementation of the revised rules after seven years.
On Monday evening, Members will debate a Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL) legislative-initiative report with recommendations to the Commission on protecting workers from asbestos. The committee calls for a ‘European strategy for the removal of all asbestos’, a substance which causes cancer, killing 30 000 to 90 000 people in the EU every year. Given the persistence of asbestos in buildings in the EU and the need to update exposure limits, the EMPL committee proposes to connect policies to remove asbestos, strengthen worker protection and support for victims. This could include updating current legislation on protecting workers, and new proposals on recognising occupational diseases and standards for compensation, as well as mandatory screening of buildings.
Looking beyond the EU’s borders, and against the background of China’s renewed and aggressive pursuit of its ‘One China’ policy, a timely debate on EU-Taiwan political relations and cooperation is scheduled for Tuesday afternoon. There are many reasons for Parliament’s continued support for Taiwan, not least its position as an active democracy in the region and as an industrial nation supplying vital semiconductors, among other things. The Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) report accompanying the draft recommendation calls for an enhanced partnership, a stronger bilateral investment agreement, supports Taiwan’s efforts to gain a seat at the international table, and expresses concern regarding the Chinese position. Members are expected to vote later in the session on a draft recommendation to the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President.
The Commission is also expected to make statements to Parliament during the session on its 2022 work programme, the rule of law crisis in Poland, on pushbacks at the EU’s external borders, on preparations for the European Council meeting later in the week and the outcome of the Western Balkans Summit.
Categories: European Union
Women in fisheries
Written by Frederik Scholaert.
Fishing is often seen as a male activity, especially when it comes to working on board fishing vessels and involving long absences at sea. However, women play an important role in thefisheries sector, especially in small-scale family businesses. Either they are involved in the fishing activity itself, on board or on foot as shellfish gatherers, or they support the business through on-shore activities such as fishing gear preparation and maintenance, transporting fish to auctions, sales, administration, logistics or even the development of tourist activities.
This work is not always recognised. According to a study for the European Commission, the share of unpaid women in fisheries (6.6 %) is almost double their share in total employment (3.8 %). However, this level of employment is an underestimate, as women who are not actively engaged on board fishing vessels are often not visible in the official statistics. A 2018 study collected data from community-led partnerships called ‘Fisheries Local Action Groups’ (FLAGs) that bring together the private sector, local authorities and civil society. Based on a sample of data, the study estimated female employment in FLAG areas at about 13 % of total employment in fisheries.
Women are also very present in other seafood sectors. They represent about a quarter of the aquaculture workforce and about half in the fish processing industry. The figures differ greatly per EU country and region. In Lithuania, the share of female workers in fish processing is 69 %. The share is even higher in specific FLAG areas, it is estimated at 75 % in Costa a Morte in Spain and 90 % in Plodovi Mora in Croatia.
In total, it is estimated that more than 100 000 women were employed in the EU’s fisheries, aquaculture or fish processing sectors in 2014.
Although women make up a significant part of the workforce, they often work in underpaid and low-value positions. In addition, they are under-represented in decision‑making bodies.
The European Parliament has long championed the important role of women in fishing communities, both in the EU and as part of ‘sustainable fisheries partnership agreements’ with non-EU countries. Following its 2014 resolution on specific actions in the common fisheries policy (CFP) to develop the role of women, Parliament adopted a resolution ‘Fishers for the future‘ on 16 September 2021. The resolution highlights the fact that women still lack sufficient economic and social recognition for their role in fisheries, and calls on the European Commission to launch initiatives to recognise their work and secure equal pay between men and women (not least in view of the 2020‑2025 gender equality strategy), support female entrepreneurship and provide EU funding.
In March 2021, in response to a letter from AKTEA, a European network of women in fisheries and aquaculture, European Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries, Virginijus Sinkevičius acknowledged the need for greater recognition of the role of women in fisheries, including in decision-making. The Commissioner highlighted the ongoing efforts to enhance the collection of social data, including data on the role of women, for example in unpaid jobs. These social data would feed into the 2022 review of the common fisheries policy and pave the way for better assessment of the social impacts of fisheries management measures.
In addition, the recent adoption of the fund supporting the common fisheries policy – the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) for 2021‑2027 – allows EU countries to continue to finance measures that support women in the seafood sector. As part of the EMFAF programme, the Commission has also announced that it will launch a call for projects in 2022, to support women in the ‘blue economy’.
The European Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries has also reaffirmed its commitment to address gender inequality issues, by organising a debate on ‘gender equality in fisheries‘ on 28 October 2021, during the European Gender Equality Week.
For more background information and analysis, see our topical digest on women in fisheries, prepared for the European Gender Equality Week (25‑28 October 2021).
Categories: European Union
What if novel drug delivery methods revolutionised medicine? [Science and Technology podcast]
Written by Gianluca Quaglio with Marcos Fernández Álvarez.
Nanoparticles lie at the heart of a new method for delivering medicines inside the body – and they were crucial to the success of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. This new drug delivery method and others could transform the way we treat disease, potentially boosting the treatment of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and HIV, among others. Insulin and Covid-19 vaccines might even become available as pills. Can the European Union stay on top of this trend? And what challenges lie ahead?
Developing a vaccine usually takes more than 10 years. But when the Covid-19 pandemic hit, vaccines were rolled out at an unprecedented speed. China notified the WHO of a cluster of cases of pneumonia on 31 December 2019. Less than one year later, the EU regulator approved the BioNTech-Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Moderna’s version – another mRNA vaccine – followed two weeks later.
First proposed in the 1990s, medical use of mRNA vaccines was only made possible by recent advances in drug delivery. These vaccines contain a set of ‘instructions’ (mRNA) that tell cells how to produce viral proteins, which then trigger an immune response. Getting highly delicate mRNA into cells is far from easy, however. To protect the mRNA and facilitate its delivery, scientists encapsulated it in tiny lipid nanoparticles; without these, the BioNTech-Pfizer and Moderna vaccines would not exist.
These mRNA vaccines exemplify a crucial issue in drug development: finding effective drugs is only part of the task. Pharmacologists also need to find ways to deliver them to the parts of the body where they are needed. Tablets and capsules are easy and convenient, but many drugs (such as insulin) degrade rapidly in the gastrointestinal tract. These drugs are administered by injection, an unpleasant method with poor patient compliance. In addition, therapeutic agents in pills and injections are transported by the circulatory system, and often reach the whole body. This increases the risk of side-effects. Many otherwise effective drugs are discarded on account of their unacceptable side effects. Designing these drugs to reach only their intended site of action could unleash their potential.
Until the Covid-19 pandemic, drug delivery had not witnessed a breakthrough for a few decades. That could be about to change. Nanotechnology, new materials and novel devices promise to revolutionise the field.
Potential impacts and developmentsDrug delivery refers to methods and devices for transporting medicines to their targets inside the body. The ideal drug delivery method releases the ingredient exactly where it is needed: to the whole body or targeted at certain sites. It also controls the rate and time of release – sometimes extending over long periods of time.
Implantable devices can release drugs at a defined rate for weeks or even months. They also offer targeted delivery, thereby reducing the risk of side effects. Implantable devices have been used in contraception and cancer treatment, but their potential is much wider. US researchers have developed an implantable capsule that uses thousands of nanochannels to control the drug release rate, and could be used to treat HIV for a year. Coupled with 3D printing, implantable devices could be personalised further to meet individual patients’ needs.
The delivery of drugs to the brain is a major challenge in drug development. The blood-brain barrier (BBB), which consists primarily of closely wedged endothelial cells lining the interior of the capillaries that connect the bloodstream to brain tissue, prevents toxins and pathogens from reaching the brain. It is also impenetrable for many drugs. Yet delivering drugs past the BBB is crucial to treating neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. Focused ultrasounds can be used to disrupt the BBB temporarily; this method can be enhanced through combination with the intravenous administration of microbubbles. Electric pulses can also be used to create micro-and nanopores to allow therapeutic ingredients to pass to the brain. Alternatively, the nasal route can be used to bypass the blood-brain barrier.
About 60 million Europeans have diabetes and many of them require regular insulin injections. Developing oral forms of insulin would significantly improve their quality of life and enhance patient compliance. Unfortunately, insulin and similar drugs (biologics, i.e. substances consisting of a living organism or its products) are highly susceptible to degradation in the gastrointestinal tract. Furthermore, unlike most oral medications, these are big molecules that are not easily absorbed by the intestine. To overcome these barriers, pharmacologists are seeking to improve biologics’ stability. They are also working on coatings to protect the drug cargo, and permeation enhancers to temporarily increase permeability across the intestine. On this note, some researchers claim that the next Covid-19 vaccine could be taken as a pill.
Nanomedicine is often seen as the technology destined to revolutionise drug delivery. Nanoparticles smaller than 100 nanometres (1 000 times smaller than a human hair) could soon make it possible to reach targets previously considered ‘undruggable’. They could also combine diagnostics and medical treatment in a single drug (theranostics), and help break the BBB.
However, nanoparticles have faced increased criticism in recent years. Promising results on mice in the 1990s persuaded researchers that a breakthrough in cancer treatment was easily within reach and public bodies devoted significant funding to it. Two decades later, that promise has yet to materialise. Cancer treatment still relies mainly on radiotherapy and chemotherapy. In 2018, only 34 nanomedicines were approved in the EU. Some researchers openly questioned whether nanoparticles would ever deliver, and highlighted the risk of overfunding this research at the expense of other promising technologies.
In the end, nanoparticles were vindicated, not by a breakthrough in cancer therapy – but by the overwhelming success of mRNA vaccines. There are hopes that this success will precede many others. The sequencing of the human genome has enabled the development of large numbers of drugs based on peptides and proteins. Delivering these molecules will be more challenging than delivering conventional drugs, and nanoparticles could be the enabling technology to make this happen. Nanoparticles could also be crucial in gene therapy.
Anticipatory policy-makingIn 2020, the global market for advanced drug delivery systems amounted to US$231 billion, and this figure is expected to rise to US$310 billion by 2025. The EU is second to the US in the global pharmaceutical market, and access to quality healthcare is the third most pressing concern of European citizens. Technological advances could soon transform traditional drug delivery, and proactive policy-making could help the EU stay on top of these developments. The European Commission and EU Member States invested heavily in research on nanoparticles, which were ultimately crucial for mRNA vaccines. Nevertheless, to date, nanoparticles have not delivered in the area where they were most promising: cancer therapy. Additional research and efforts are needed in this regard.
The advent of cheaper, safer and more effective ways to deliver gene therapy could boost ‘biohacking‘ and transhumanism. Although governments do have legal tools to curb practices that endanger public health and several EU Member States ban genome editing outside licensed laboratories, emerging technologies could fall in legal grey zones, raising new ethical dilemmas, and making government oversight even more difficult. These are the challenges that policy-makers could be facing shortly; evidence-informed foresight and preparedness are key to providing effective responses.
Read the complete briefing on ‘What if novel drug delivery methods revolutionised medicine?‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Listen to policy podcast ‘What if novel drug delivery methods revolutionised medicine?’ on YouTube.
Categories: European Union
Understanding the EU’s response to illicit drugs [Policy Podcast]
Written by Katrien Luyten.
The EU is an important market for illicit drugs, both in terms of consumption and production. An estimated 28.9 % of European adults aged 15-65 have used illicit drugs at least once in their lifetime, a majority of them being men. Cannabis remains by far the most used drug, followed by cocaine, MDMA (ecstasy or molly) and amphetamines. Illicit drugs have been claiming an increasing number of lives in the EU since 2012, but their impact goes far beyond the harm caused by their use.
The illicit drugs market is the largest criminal market in the EU, with an estimated minimum retail value of €30 billion per year in the EU alone. Over a third of the organised crime groups active in the EU are involved in the trade in illicit drugs, which, besides generating massive criminal profits and inflicting substantial harm, incites associated violence. Drug markets furthermore have links with wider criminal activity, including terrorism; they have a negative impact on the legal economy and communities, cause environmental damage and can fuel corruption and undermine governance.
Illicit drugs have been trafficked into and through the EU for decades, but they are also produced in the EU, for both local and global markets, as is the case of cannabis and synthetic drugs such as amphetamines. In fact, the trade in synthetic drugs in the EU is unique compared to other substances as the production of these drugs and new psychoactive substances in most cases takes place in the EU. In 2019, around 1.1 million seizures of illicit drugs were reported in the EU-27 plus Norway, Turkey and the UK. The European drug market has been remarkably resilient to disruption caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
Although the EU Member States carry the primary responsibility for developing their drug policy and legislation, cross-border cooperation is paramount in the fight against illicit drugs. With the problem constantly expanding in scale and complexity, the EU has been increasingly active since the early 1990s, in particular with respect to law enforcement, health-related issues and the detection and risk assessment of new psychoactive substances.
Read the complete briefing on ‘Understanding the EU’s response to drugs‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Listen to policy podcast ‘Understanding the EU’s response to illicit drugs’ on YouTube.
Categories: European Union
Outcome of the meetings of EU leaders in Brdo pri Kranju on 5-6 October 2021
Written by Suzana Anghel with Mauro Borghetto.
The EU leaders met on 5 October 2021 in Brdo pri Kranju, Slovenia, to discuss informally the Union’s role in the world over a working dinner. The meeting was coupled with an EU-Western Balkan Summit the next day. The focus at the dinner was on security and defence in the context of the ‘Strategic Compass’ process, to be finalised by March 2022, with EU leaders agreeing to continue deepening defence cooperation, not least by strengthening the alliance with NATO. The leaders also confirmed their 2019-2024 strategic agenda commitment to strengthen the EU’s capacity to ‘act autonomously’, albeit without agreeing on the modalities. Building unity was central to this preparatory summit. Migration and energy were also raised briefly, but will be addressed in greater detail at future meetings. The EU-Western Balkans Summit on 6 October highlighted the strategic importance of the region for the Union. The focus was on the common commitment to socio-economic recovery and the development of the Western Balkans in the post-pandemic phase, with €30 billion mobilised for investment as part of the economic and investment plan for the Western Balkans. EU leaders also focused on ways to strengthen political dialogue and security cooperation. The ‘Brdo Declaration’ reaffirmed the region’s European perspective and the EU’s commitment to enlargement, with the caveats of ‘credible reforms’, ‘rigorous conditionality’ and that the assessment of individual countries’ progress on the basis of the ‘principle of own merits’.
1. BackgroundThe 2021-22 indicative Leaders’ Agenda included an informal dinner of the members of the European Council on 5 October 2021, followed the next day by an EU-Western Balkans Summit. The two events, held in Brdo pri Kranju, were chaired by the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, and hosted by the Prime Minister of Slovenia, Janez Janša, in the framework of the current six-month Slovenian Presidency of the Council of the European Union.
2. Informal European Council meetingThe European Council does not adopt conclusions at its informal meetings. Yet, for the second time, President Michel issued ‘oral conclusions’, building on a practice he established in January 2021 in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. The document – combining conclusions and post-summit remarks – sets out a schedule for forthcoming security and defence debates (see Table 1).
Policy areaActionActorScheduleEnergy*Debate on energy market and pricesEuropean CouncilOctober 2021Security and defenceStrategic compass process follow-upEuropean CouncilDecember 2021Security and defenceStrategic compass expected to be endorsedEuropean CouncilMarch 2022Table 1 – New European Council commitments and requests with a specific timeline Leaders’ Agenda: Gradual revival of a working methodThe Brdo pri Kranju meeting might be a turning point in Charles Michel’s Presidency of the European Council, as far as the European Council’s working methods are concerned. So far, since he took office in December 2019, two Leaders’ Agenda documents have been presented – in October 2020 and June 2021. They have been used largely as work programmes, indicating the items that could feature on the European Council’s agenda during a set period of time. However, the rationale behind the first Leaders’ Agenda presented back in 2017 by the then President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, was to offer both a work programme and a working method for the European Council.
The Leaders’ Agenda working method originally consisted of circulating a Leader’s Note on a subject which the European Council would first discuss informally with a view to building consensus on the substance and sometimes on the language. The outcome of that discussion would then be enshrined in conclusions, which EU leaders would usually adopt at their next formal meeting. The entire process relied on a key element– unity – built informally within the European Council. In his invitation to the informal meeting in Brdo pri Kranju, Charles Michel indicated that what he intended to achieve was unity on ways to tackle the global challenges facing the EU. Although no Leaders’ Note was circulated ahead of the meeting, the Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, summed up the meeting as ‘a brainstorming debate – and very useful’.
The partial revival of the Leader’s Agenda working method allowed President Michel to remain master of the agenda and avoid the sharp divisions sparked, for example, by the strategic debate on relations with Russia held in June 2021. A Leaders’ Note would not have guaranteed more rapid consensus-building, but could have helped to structure the debate.
Main results of the informal European Council meetingThe indicative agenda mentioned China and trade. The President, Charles Michel, used his invitation letter to further develop the agenda, and to announce that the EU leaders would ‘have a strategic discussion on the role of the Union on the international stage in light of recent developments in Afghanistan, the AUKUS security partnership and the evolution of our relations with China’. He thus centred the debate on core foreign and security policy issues.
EU’s role in the worldEU leaders held a debate on the EU’s global role, considering the Union’s strengths and weaknesses, as well as its ability to defend its values and pursue its interests. On strengths, the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, reminded the meeting that the EU was ‘the world’s biggest trading bloc’, a front-runner in the fight against climate change and a respected ‘normative power’, by setting standards, for example, in the digital field, that give high consideration to the individual. As to weaknesses, President Michel stressed the European Council’s commitment to reducing dependencies and achieving resilience in areas such as energy, cybersecurity and external trade.
Mr Michel recalled the consensus, brokered in the 2019-2024 strategic agenda, on the need to increase the EU’s ‘capacity to act autonomously’. He also stressed the importance of a ‘more assertive and effective’ Union benefiting from strong strategic partnerships, such as the transatlantic one. Nevertheless, EU leaders did not clarify how the EU could increase its ‘capacity to act autonomously’ in or across different policy areas. This aspect may however be tackled subsequently as part of forthcoming sectoral policy debates following which the European Council could be expected to set new strategic orientation guidelines. For now, the EU leaders largely reiterated some of their past statements. For example, on trade and international relations, they reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to multilateralism and to a rules-based international order, rejecting ‘protectionism’, calling for reciprocity and a level playing field in global trade. China, the only global power to feature in the President’s ‘oral conclusions’, was described in the terms used in the 2019 EU-China strategy, namely ‘as a competitor, a partner and a systemic rival’.
The French President, Emmanuel Macron, considered the summit to be a stepping-stone to enable EU leaders to advance in their reflection on the Union’s role in the world, while stressing that the EU needed to reflect on its relations with its neighbours, including Russia and Turkey. He also emphasised the need to look at relations with the US ‘with lucidity’, but recalled the common history and the bond linking the US to its European allies. The High Representative, Josep Borrell, spoke of the geopolitical shifts and the increasing US-China bi-polarity. He stressed the need for the EU to create a common strategic culture to enable it to respond to common challenges.
Security and defence: Focus on the strategic compassRecent developments in Afghanistan and the AUKUS security partnership, although important, were not the focus but rather the enabler of the security and defence debate. The debate centred on the strategic compass process, which has entered its final phase (drafting and adoption) (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 – Strategic compass timelineThe European Council held an initial debate on the strategic compass in February 2021. EU leaders were then presented with the results of the first-ever EU threat assessment. This allowed them to be closely associated with the process from the early stages and to avoid being presented only with the end result, as had largely been the case with the EU Global Strategy back in 2016. This approach might allow them to seek political consensus and ultimately arrive at an inclusive end result.
Three elements are worth highlighting. First, the Strategic Compass exercise is on track and expected to be completed by March 2022, and the European Council is eager to ‘steer the process’. Second, there is political agreement among EU leaders on the need to continue deepening European defence cooperation. Third, EU leaders have reaffirmed the importance of working with partners, including NATO, a ‘cornerstone’ of EU security. A new EU-NATO declaration is being prepared ahead of the June 2022 NATO summit, and EU leaders had a preliminary discussion on this subject too. The Prime Minister of Latvia, Krišjānis Karinš, stressed that the main question EU leaders faced was how to make the EU and the Member States stronger within existing alliances.
MigrationThe German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, warned her colleagues of a possible new migratory wave. The European Council agreed to return to migration at one of its next meetings. The European Commission will soon present a proposal for a revision of the Schengen Borders Code. This was originally expected for the second quarter of 2021, and is now envisaged for November 2021.
Energy pricesEnergy was raised briefly in the context of the rise in prices in recent months, which was denounced by five Member States – Czechia, Spain, France, Greece and Romania – in a common statement. The European Council last discussed the issue back in 2014, when it stressed the importance of ensuring ‘affordable energy prices’. EU leaders are expected to consider this topic at their meeting on 21‑22 October 2021. The European Commission is due to publish a communication on energy prices ahead of that meeting, which will serve as a basis for the debate. President Macron stressed that energy prices were both a global market issue and a geopolitical problem for the EU.
3. EU-Western Balkans summitEU leaders adopted the Brdo Declaration, in many respects similar to the Sofia Declaration (2018) and the Zagreb Declaration (2020). On a political level, the three declarations confirm the European perspective of the Western Balkans. The EU’s commitment to the enlargement process is mentioned in the Brdo Declaration, with the caveat that countries in the region should stay on course for reforms, with fair and rigorous conditionality to be applied as well as assessment according to individual merits. Ursula von der Leyen confirmed the European Commission’s attachment to the enlargement process, whereas Charles Michel noted the EU Member States’ focus being on the EU’s inner reforms in the context of the Conference on the Future of Europe, before further enlarging the Union. The declaration states that the EU is ‘the region’s closest partner, main investor and principal donor’. In this context see Figure 2.
Figure 2 – EU trade with, and aid to, the Western BalkansIn a letter to Charles Michel, the President of the European Parliament, David Sassoli, stressed that ‘the accession process of the countries of the Western Balkans needs a new and strong impetus’ and that ‘current blockages’ need to be overcome. The EU has offered to facilitate the process and help foster dialogue between Bulgaria and North Macedonia in order to overcome the current deadlock. Solving border disputes and minority rights were two other issues on which further work was required. No accession date was set. The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, said that she did not ‘really believe in setting dates’, but rather in keeping promises once conditions are met.
Read this briefing on ‘Outcome of the meetings of EU leaders in Brdo pri Kranju on 5-6 October 2021‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
All-encompassing transformation, creative AI and superhumans: How will AI will change humanity?
Written by Annastiina Papunen (Directorate-General for Internal Policies / AIDA Committee secretariat).
As a general-purpose technology, artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to reshape societies and humanity itself. To shed light on current and future AI developments, EPRS organised an online policy roundtable to discuss ‘How will Artificial Intelligence change humanity? Exploring the social and political implications of our digital futures’, on 29 September 2021. The inspiration for the discussion came from a report entitled ‘Humans and Societies in the Age of Artificial Intelligence‘, written by two distinguished experts, Vladimir Sucha from UNESCO and Jean‑Philippe Gammel from the European Commission. EPRS Director-General Anthony Teasdale opened the event.
‘This transformation is changing everything,’ keynote speaker Eva Kaili (S&D, Greece) said, adding that she was glad to see several new aspects of the AI revolution covered in the report. Diving further into the AI transition, Eva Kaili stressed that it is important to understand the challenges, to look at how to address them proactively, to ensure that ‘AI is for good’. Facial and emotion recognition technology for example are potentially harmful applications, as they may lead to manipulation of human behaviour – even to an erosion of fundamentals such as freedom of choice and of thought. Highlighting the pioneering work carried out by STOA and the Centre for AI, Eva Kaili highlighted the need for international cooperation to ensure the ethical use of AI. She concluded with an interesting note: if creativity is no longer only a human skill, but something AI can also master, what will this mean for humanity?
- keynote speaker Eva Kaili (S&D, Greece)
‘Transformation, transformation, transformation’ – is the main message of the report. The swift and fundamental AI transformation is unprecedented in human history, and according to Vladimir Sucha, the positive as well as the negative changes could have a profound and disruptive effect on our lives and societies. An audience poll resulted in 50 % of the respondents saying they strongly or somewhat agreed with the statement that ‘AI is triggering the deepest and the fastest shift humanity has ever experienced’. Machines are already better than people at recognising human emotions, and as 85 % of human decisions are based on emotion, a majority of decisions may be manipulated through AI in the future, warned Vladimir Sucha. Furthermore, creativity is no longer a human prerogative, as illustrated by an op-ed in the Guardian, written by the language model GPT-3. The future will also see AI cognitive extenders, brain computer interfaces and digital immortality, which may lead to ‘superhumans’ with powers and capabilities beyond normal people’s reach. Up to 25 % of young people are reporting mental issues, and we should investigate the causal link between this and digitalisation. As a final point Vladimir Sucha noted that our best bet to be ready for future and to ‘not let others write it for us’ is to invest in education, psychological resilience and ‘EMC2′ – which stands for ’empathy, mindfulness, critical inquiry and compassion’.
An expert panel delved deeper into these themes, moderated by the Head of Unit at Parliament’s AIDA special committee, Marcus Scheuren. Heather Grabbe from the Open Society European Policy Institute, referred to Professor Hariri’s book, Homo Deus, noting that ‘It is important to see AI not as a series of technical issues, but ones that will deeply affect democracy and even what it means to be human. People are beginning to become concerned, and rightly so, about how automated decision-making will affect their lives’. Heather Grabbe also stressed that it is essential to ensure that AI reflects our values and to address structural discrimination immediately. She also advocated involving people in decision-making as a way to increase trust in technology.
According to Professor Andrea Renda, the best way to understand humans in the age of AI is to see how humans have adapted to technology in the past. As an example, he mentioned the emergence of photography and how painters reacted by moving to more abstract forms of art. He also spoke about the importance of the internet of things (IoT) revolution in the AI context, as by 2035 there may be as many as a trillion connected devices, creating a fifth element, an ‘information and data envelope’ around us. Regarding regulation specifically, Professor Renda said that the proposed AI Act is a very good start, as strong governance of AI is essential. Finally, he stressed that it is important to discuss these things together before ‘the utopia of how AI will empower us will turn to a dystopia where AI will kill us’. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Anthony Gooch called for a rethink of the notion of wellbeing in the light of digital transformation. To start the process, the OECD has begun to explore what quality of life means in the digital age, and Anthony Gooch highlighted that ‘we need to measure what we treasure’. Bruegel’s Laura Nurski added that ‘non-profit concerns’, such as environmental, social, psychological and wellbeing issues, are often not included in algorithmic decision-making, which is problematic. Stressing that as long as humans decide what to optimise, Laura Nurski noted that it is vital to incorporate ‘good targets’ into algorithms. She advocated for careful consideration of which decisions are handed over to AI, as autonomy and decision-making skills are essential for humans, and if we stop making decisions and practising – we may lose our ability to decide.
The questions from the audience revolved around the concepts of intelligence, creativity, being human or superhuman and digital immortality. Jean‑Philippe Gammel, co-author of the report, raised the question of whether we could consider a machine as an artist. If people are not aware of who created the artwork, they cannot distinguish the work of a machine from the work of a human, but if people know the creator was AI, they will often say that the art ‘lacks soul’. The issue is no longer a scientific question, but has become a philosophical one.
Categories: European Union
The European Green Deal and cohesion policy
Written by Agnieszka Widuto.
In line with its commitments under the Paris Agreement on climate change, in 2019 the EU adopted an ambitious strategy for reaching climate neutrality by 2050: the European Green Deal. The significant reduction of greenhouse gas emissions needed to achieve it will require profound social and economic changes, while ensuring a socially fair and just transition.
As climate change is linked to the greenhouse effect, the EU’s actions for reducing emissions involve greening high-emissions sectors such as fossil fuels-based energy, transport, agriculture, manufacturing and waste management. Triggered by climate change, heatwaves, water stress, wildfires, coastal flooding and extreme weather events affect EU regions with varying degrees of severity and will require a tailored approach to mitigation.
The transition towards climate neutrality cannot be achieved through environmental policies alone. Cohesion policy, which accounts for about one third of the EU budget, supports this process by earmarking funding for climate action, for ‘climate proofing’ investments and for implementing specific actions in EU regions. In addition to the traditional cohesion policy funds (European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund and European Social Fund Plus), a new Just Transition Fund will support the transition in regions relying on fossil fuels and high-emissions industries over the period of 2021-2027. Moreover, one out of the five cohesion policy objectives in the current funding period is entirely dedicated to a greener Europe and fosters investment in clean energy, the circular economy, climate change mitigation and sustainable transport. As the main goal of cohesion policy is to prevent the widening of disparities, it can thus help support those regions that bear the heaviest burden of the transition and make sure that no region is left behind.
Local and regional authorities across the EU are also working together to tackle climate challenges by participating in the European Climate Pact and in initiatives such as the Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy, Mayors Alliance for the European Green Deal, and Green Deal Going Local.
Read the complete briefing on ‘The European Green Deal and cohesion policy‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Plenary round-up – October I 2021
Written by Katarzyna Sochacka and Clare Ferguson.
During the first plenary session of October 2021 in Strasbourg, Parliament held a number of debates, in particular on the proposed EU Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority, which should ensure a coordinated EU approach for future health crises. Debate also took place on possible European solutions to the rise in energy prices for businesses and consumers and the role of energy efficiency and renewable energy, highlighting the need to tackle energy poverty. Members discussed the release of the Pandora Papers and the implications for efforts to combat money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance.
Debates were held on several human rights issues, including the humanitarian situation in Tigray. Members heard a statement from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell, on the situation in Belarus following the violent repression of protest in the country.
A number of resolutions and legislative acts were adopted, inter alia on artificial intelligence in criminal law, the EU road safety policy framework 2021‑2030, the Aarhus Regulation on access to information and public participation in environmental matters, on the state of EU cyber-defence capabilities, and on the Banking Union annual report 2020.
European Union Agency for AsylumA compromise agreement reached on the proposal to revise the regulation on the European Union Agency for Asylum (EASO) is an important step forward in building future common European migration and asylum policy. Members debated the compromise reached by negotiators from the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), in which Parliament successfully championed a stronger EASO mission, including support for processing asylum applications and addressing the root causes of migration in third countries. The reinforced role agreed for EASO includes a stronger focus on protection of fundamental rights, with the agency expected to engage a fundamental rights officer, a pool of 500 experts, a new complaints mechanism, and to step up the frequency of its monitoring of Member States’ implementation of the common European asylum system. The vote on this report will be held at a future part-session.
Future of EU-US relationsFollowing a debate, Members voted on a Foreign Affairs (AFET) Committee report on the future of EU-US relations – a topic that has often hit the headlines in recent weeks – by a very large majority. The rapid US withdrawal from Afghanistan, with fears of large-scale refugee movements to neighbouring countries, is just one of the issues to have caused difficulties in transatlantic relations in recent months. The AFET report acknowledged the recent divergences between the transatlantic partners, but nevertheless called on them to take advantage of their strong partnership, based on shared values, to strengthen multilateralism. While the EU seeks to become more self-reliant in security and defence matters, considerable room remains for common action on foreign policy, security and economic objectives.
EU cyber defence capabilitiesParliament debated and voted on another AFET committee report, again with a large majority, on the state of EU cyber-defence capabilities. Threats to society have become increasingly digital as malicious cyber-actors, from lone wolves to states themselves, have taken advantage of the vulnerabilities introduced by digitalisation to wage ‘cyber war’. Indeed, calls for a European cyber-defence policy and for a cyber-resilience act were made as recently as during last month’s State of the Union debate. The AFET report proposes to strengthen EU cyber-defence capabilities through strong cooperation, both with NATO and internally, with the ongoing Strategic Compass process providing an opportunity to reduce the current fragmentation in the EU’s cyber-defence architecture.
EU policy on harmful tax practicesGlobal tax reform is another hot topic on the EU-US agenda. Tax evasion and aggressive tax planning exacerbate social inequalities and disrupt competition, all of which – particularly since the pandemic – has led to increasing demands from both public and parliaments to address the issue more forcefully. With EU policy reform on harmful tax practices more prominent on the agenda, Parliament held a debate, followed by a vote on a report from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON). Among other things, the report recommends that further negotiations are based on the G7 commitment to ‘a global minimum tax of at least 15 % on a country by country basis’. The report also urges revision of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation and calls for fairer and more transparent tax incentives.
Artificial intelligence in criminal lawMembers debated and voted on a Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee own-initiative report on police and judicial authorities’ use of AI in criminal matters. Underlining the need to preserve Europeans’ fundamental rights when AI is used in law enforcement and criminal justice, the report notably calls for a ban on facial recognition systems in law enforcement. While the possibilities that artificial intelligence (AI) affords to tackle cyber and other security situations could improve prevention and detection of crime, its use comes with other clear dangers to fundamental rights, as can be seen in countries that have taken this path.
The Arctic: Opportunities, concerns and security challengesThe Arctic region is rich in natural resources, including hydrocarbons, and yet paradoxically also faces both opportunities and vulnerabilities brought about by climate change. Parliament debated and voted on a Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) own-initiative report (with a draft recommendation to other European institutions under Rule 118) on the Arctic region. The report supports the EU strategy in the Arctic, and calls for the region to remain a zone of peaceful cooperation, warning of the growing risk of confrontation in the region as Russia and China eye the opportunities of easier access to shipping lanes and natural resources such as rare earths and fisheries. The AFET committee is particularly concerned about the environmental and security impacts of such economic activity, both for biodiversity and for the four million people who live in the eight countries that cover the Arctic region – particularly indigenous communities.
EU-Greenland Sustainable Fisheries Partnership AgreementGreenland plays a specific geostrategic role in the Arctic and the North Atlantic, not least when it comes to the region’s fisheries. Members considered the renewal of the key protocol under the EU-Greenland Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement (SFPA), regulating the sustainable exchange of quotas between Greenland, Norway and the Faroe Islands. As the protocol expired in 2020, Parliament’s Committee on Fisheries (PECH) recommended its renewal, while calling for improved data collection and sustainable management of stocks fished by the EU. The renewal was approved by an overwhelming majority.
Opening of trilogue negotiationsMembers confirmed one mandate for negotiations from the Industry Research and Energy (ITRE) Committee on the proposal for a regulation on guidelines for the trans-European energy infrastructure.
Read this ‘at a glance’ on ‘Plenary round-up – October I 2021‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Cities in a globalised world: Exploring trends and the effect on urban resilience
Written by Andres Garcia Higuera, Sorina Silvia Ionescu, Nera Kuljanic, Henrique André Morgado Simões, Eric Pichon, Jaan Soone, Yann-Sven Rittelmeyer, Eckhard Werner Binder and Ionel Zamfir.
Cities are inevitably affected by shocks and disruptions, the coronavirus pandemic being a case in point. The extent of the impact however depends on cities’ preparedness and capacity to adapt. Forward thinking is needed to explore emerging or plausible developments so that they can be anticipated and their disruptive nature contained. Both short- and long-term challenges can be better overcome through the use of foresight analysis and resilience.
Taking the policy approach recommended by the European Commission’s 2020 Strategic Foresight Report and drawing on the ‘Global Trends to 2030: Challenges and Choices for Europe’ report from the European Strategy and Policy Analysis System (ESPAS), this EPRS paper looks at developments expected in cities as a result of current global trends, and reflects on the impacts, implications, opportunities and challenges for urban resilience.
The global trends identified relate to climate change, population growth, urbanisation, economic growth, increasing energy demand, higher connectivity, and a changing world order. They will have direct consequences for the future of cities and their inhabitants and may affect their resilience in key areas such as: urban governance, urban living, the urban economy and urban mobility. A reflection on the future of urban growth in the world completes the analysis.
Some of the main lessons that can be drawn from the study are summed up below:
- Urban governance: cities need to be better able to act autonomously and better organised (through network cooperation, exchange of good practice, etc.) in order to tackle challenges such as climate change and migration. Growing urban populations, combined with digitalisation and populism, are shaping local democracy. Appropriate mechanisms and instruments to support the relationship between a city and its inhabitants have to be in place for the development of harmonious and inclusive cities.
- Urban spaces and housing: climate change has consequences for cities – for instance in terms of social, demographic and technological developments – that require urban planners and decision-makers to react. Making the best use of new technologies and digitalisation, while keeping in mind the social dimension, will be crucial for the future of urban life. By doing so, the ongoing urbanisation can lead to more socially equal cities, offering an energy-efficient environment.
- Urban economy and work: economies globally and at the level of cities are being affected by the digital and green transitions. This will bring opportunities for growth, innovation and diversification, potentially improving cities’ ability to withstand economic shocks, but will also open economies to new vulnerabilities, such as network failures and cyber-attacks. These transformations will also likely come with significant disruptions in terms of job losses in sectors with a larger environmental footprint and in sectors where automation can replace tasks previously done by people. New services will also have a disruptive impact on a number of incumbent service providers. Social cohesion and urban resilience will depend to a large extent on how these transitions are managed through national governments’ labour market policies, but can also be improved by cities themselves tackling inequality.
- Urban mobility: trends affecting urban transportation (climate change, digitalisation, technological advances) lead to developments with varying effects. New transport options (electric vehicles, automated vehicles, shared mobility, etc.) can be positive for the resilience of cities by providing alternatives in cases of systemic disruptions but can also be disruptive to the existing systems. Similarly, digitalisation allows for better access to mobility services, thereby bolstering cohesion and inclusiveness, but also makes transport systems more susceptible to network failures and cyber-attacks.
- Urban growth in the world: several issues and questions are raised by unabating urbanisation, with megacities continuing to expand, in particular in Africa and Asia. Despite a robust economic and financial outlook, megacities need to strengthen their sustainability in the face of multiple social and environmental challenges. Their scale exposes them to various crises, but they have shown remarkable resilience in recent times. Urban planners and decision-makers are also looking for alternatives by creating new cities from scratch, based on sustainability concepts.
Read the complete study on ‘Cities in a globalised world: Exploring trends and the effect on urban resilience‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Categories: European Union
Pages
the old site is here
© 2012-2015 Europa Varietas Foundation © 2015-2020 Europa Varietas Association
www.europavarietas.org | info(@)europavarietas(dot)org | Switzerland
This is a GDPR ready site
We are looking for sponsors for the English translation of these books, please contact turkeandras(at)gmail(dot)com