首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Economic Policy Studies >Bad rules rather than slow discretion? A critical appraisal of EU stabilisation policy
【24h】

Bad rules rather than slow discretion? A critical appraisal of EU stabilisation policy

机译:糟糕的规则而不是缓慢谨慎?欧盟的稳定政策的评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The EU reacted swiftly to the economic dimension of Covid-19 by designing new instruments to support the fiscal policy of Member States. But entry into force and implementation was slow due to various political hurdles with little action taking effectby the end of 2020. In a draft law currently under consideration in the European Parliament, the Commission proposes speedier crisis responses using a rules-based approach. We analyse the legal and economic aspects of this so-called "European InvestmentStabilisation Function" (EISF) and argue that a rules-based policy may be inefficient and detrimental to important EU policy objectives. For instance, in the Covid-19 crisis, most of the EISF funds would have supported only the wealthiest Member States.In general, we show that well-intended EU-funded stabilisation measures may actually be counterproductive in terms of EU cohesion, suboptimal in terms of stabilisation and regressive in terms of cross-country income distribution.
机译:欧盟经济维度做出迅速反应Covid-19设计新的仪器支持成员国的财政政策。生效和执行缓慢各种政治障碍小行动effectby 2020年底。目前正在考虑在欧洲议会委员会提出了更快危机响应使用基于规则的方法。分析它的法律和经济方面所谓的“欧洲InvestmentStabilisation函数”(EISF),认为基于规则的政策可能是低效的,是有害的重要的欧盟政策目标。Covid-19危机,大多数EISF基金只支持最富有的成员吗州。欧盟稳定措施实际上可能适得其反的欧盟的凝聚力,非最优的稳定和回归的越野收入分布。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号