Structural Policy


In a recent Policy Paper for the Vienna Institute of International Economics (wiiw) on EU structural policy (https://wiiw.ac.at/which-structural-reforms-does-e-m-u-need-to-function-properly–p-4782.html) I outlined conditions, definitions and developments of structural policies for the objectives laid down in the EU Treaty. The abstract is reproduced here:

Structural reform proposals have undergone significant change both as proposed by IMF and OECD as by the European Union. From a narrow flexibility-enhancing (‘liberalising’) focus complementing a strict budget consolidation course, they have evolved towards embracing institutional reforms and promoting of growth and productivity. Some of these reform proposals are motivated by increasing divergence between Member States since the financial crisis, others attempt to compensate for the fact that EMU did not and does not yet constitute an optimal currency area with all its institutions required.

This paper analyses the various motivations and restrictions for structural reforms and proposes an even wider array of additional reforms, with the aim to enhance socio-economic-environmental sustainability and well-being in the European Union (‘progressive’ reforms).
› ‘Progressive reforms’ should establish equivalence between economic, social and environmental objectives.
› Excessive ‘financialisation’ of the economy should be reversed by promoting longer-term real investment decisions, by slowing financial trading decisions, by increasing capital requirements of financial institutions, by levying financial transactions taxes, etc.
› Productivity-oriented wage setting and working conditions procedures through collective bargaining covering a wide spectrum of the labour force should be promoted as enhancing workers’ well-being and be balanced with flexibility requirements.
› Industrial policies aimed at enhancing the innovative capabilities of countries, with appropriate education, patent and innovation interventions need to gain wide-spread acceptance.
› The ‘race to the bottom’ with respect to corporate and personal income taxation, as well as generous tax-reducing policies need to be prevented.
› National and regional preferences with respect to social and cultural aspects need to be exempted from competition rules, as manifestations of social cohesion, environmental protection and identitypreserving heritage.
› In cases where cross-country spillovers matter, such ‘progressive’ structural policies should be set as general framework conditions by the European Union but be adjusted and implemented by the Member States.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under European Union, Fiscal Policy, Socio-Economic Development

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s