西欧政治与经济讲义( 英语总结)

fengweiling

Part IChapter 1
The stages of economic integration
• Free trade areas:
– Free trade between members, different external tariffs
– Little or no institutional co-ordination
• Customs union:
– Free trade between members and common external trade restriction
– Common regulatory bodies
• Common (or single) markets:
– Removal of all barriers to free factor mobility
– Free mobility of goods, capital, labour, and services
– Greater level of regulation and strong institutions to monitor decisions adopted by member states
The stages of economic integration (II)
• Economic union:
– Harmonisation of economic policies (generally monetary or fiscal policy)
– Members give up powers. Strong central institutions which dictate common economic policy
• Complete economic integration:
– All economic policy areas are harmonised
– The capacity of states to implement independent policies disappears
– Central institutions become the centres of economic decision-making
The stages of economic integration in the EU
Economic integration to achieve competitiveness
• Why did a customs union (the EC) decide to increase the pace of economic integration during the 1980s and 1990s?
– Increasing globalisation of the world economy (increased competition, especially from the US, Japan, and the NICs)
– More sophisticated systems to dodge trade barriers (multinational corporations)
– Belief that market fragmentation (nationally divided markets) was reducing economies of scale
GDP per capita (2000) in Europe, the US and Japan
The limits of European competitiveness
• The costs of the ‘non-Europe’ (Cecchini, 1991):
– Physical barriers: Intra-European stoppages, controls at border checkpoints, red-tape, different currencies…
– Technical barriers: Different national product standards and technical regulations across Member States
– Fiscal barriers: Lack of fiscal harmonisation
Physical barriers
• Custom related costs:
– Customs controls, border stoppages
– Paperwork and red-tape
– Exchange of low-value added perishable goods suffered as a result
• High administrative costs and regulatory hassles:
– Higher cost of red-tape of SMEs (higher proportion of their business volume, and lack of expertise and human resources)

mercieowen

真的谢谢了。

mercieowen

挺好的。

scholarquinn

好贴顶

Angel07814

:r :r :r

且听风吟

绝对经典~~

tencyh

支持楼主     谢谢

apple_111

祝福好人一生平安！
TOP考研论坛 - http://bbs.topkaoyan.net

鱼鱼菲菲

绝顶好帖!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

fengweiling

ut well above any other large area of the world
• However, wealth is and has been unevenly distributed across the EU:
– Until recently a core/periphery was visible
– The core: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden, the UK, and Northern Italy
– The periphery: Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Southern Italy
National disparities in the EU (II)
• Recent changes have led to a blurring of the distinction between core and periphery:
– Poor economic performance of some of the countries of the core (Finland, Sweden and the UK)
– High growth in the periphery (Ireland)
National disparities in GDP per capita and unemployment
Regional disparities in the EU
• Strong national contrasts hide even greater regional contrasts:
– In 1998, the GDP per capita of Luxembourg was 3.8 times greater than that of Portugal
– Hamburg’s GDP was 6.7 times higher than that of Ipeiros (Greece)
– Andalusia and Extremadura had unemployment rates of 32.4 and 30.2%, whereas Salzburg or Belluno had a mere 2.2 and 2.3% respectively.
• Internal economic disparities are evident in almost every single country in the EU
– Italy (GDP Lombardy 132.5 .... Calabria 59.2) (Unemployment Trentino 3.8% .... Campania 25%)
Regional disparities in the EU (II)
• Strong regional contrasts also in:
– Portugal (LiS*on and the North vs. the South and Centre)
– France (Paris vs. the rest) --Spain (Northeast and Madrid vs. South and West)
– UK (South vs. North)--Germany (South vs. North)--Sweden (South vs. North)--Belgium (North vs. South)
• No regional contrasts in:
– The Netherlands

Factors behind the existence of territorial disparities
• Factor endowment:
– Inherited economic situation: GDP per capita
– Quality and quantity of human capital: Skilled labour, matching skills with labour demands
– Accessibility: Infrastructure endowment
– Innovation: Generation and assimilation of innovation. Investment in R&D
– Sectoral structure
The need for intervention
• Do territorial differences in factor endowment justify the implementation of European development policies?
• Is a development policy really necessary?
The economic debate
• Endogenous growth theory and new economic geography:
– Greater accessibility, higher skills, and greater capacity to generate and assimilate innovation will lead to the concentration of economic activity
– A development policy is needed in order to counterbalance this tendency
• Classical Ricardian trade theory:
– Factor endowment is less important
– Integration leads to a rearrangement of ec

fengweiling

– Daimler-Chriysler--Terra Lycos--Repsol-YPF
Volume of cross-border M&A's (Billion US$)
Volume of cross-border M&A's (%)
Economies of scale (IV)
• But have EU companies become the leading actors in international M&As?
– Despite the increase in numbers and size, EU companies have lagged behind the US...
– And during much of the 1990s also behind Japan and the Asian Dragons
– Only the Asian crisis of 1997/98 changed the tide
• And a diminishing number of European companies can be found among the top 50 in the world
Location of the world's largest 50 corporations
Productivity
• European labour productivity has been reducing the gap with the US in the post-war decades
• Convergence came to an end in the second half of the 1980s
– Increasing technology gap between the US and the EU
– Permanence of fragmented markets in Europe (monopolies which prevented access to new technologies)
– Rigidity of European labour markets (which kept the young out of work)
• Productivity has grown faster in the US in the 1990s
– Some encouraging signs for EU (advantage in mobiles)
Labour Productivity Growth
Productivity in selected EU countries Growth
• On average, the EU has had slightly greater growth than the US and lower than Japan during the post-war decades
• Precisely at the time of European economic integration, the roles have been reversed
– Greater growth in the US (double that of the EMU area)
– Lower in Japan
– Strong internal divergence in growth patterns in the EU
• Extremely high growth in Ireland and Luxembourg
• Moderate in Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands and Portugal
• Low elsewhere in the EU
Average growth in the EU, US, and Japan (1960-2000)
Conclusion
• The impact of economic integration on the economic performance of the EU has not been as spectacular and immediate as predicted by ex-ante studies
• The gap between the EU and the US has increased in many areas (growth, productivity, trade, M&As)
• Different economic cycles may have a lot to say about diverging economic performances
• However, economic integration may be setting the bases for a quicker adaptation by the EU in the future to new economic challenges
Chapter 2 Introduction
• Have the alleged benefits of economic integration been evenly distributed?
• How is uneven development within the EU likely to affect the competitiveness and further economic and political integration in the EU?
National disparities in the EU
• The EU is one of the most developed spaces in the World:
– GDP per capita below that of the USA and Japan...