2018

Three years into the 2030 Agenda it is already apparent that those living in fragile contexts are the furthest behind. Not all forms of fragility make it to the public’s eye: fragility is an intricate beast, sometimes exposed, often lurking underneath, but always holding progress back. Conflict, forced displacement, violent extremism, famine etc. are all causes and consequences of fragility. Hence the need to better understand, anticipate and respond to fragility. States of Fragility 2018 exposes the critical challenge posed by fragility in achieving the aspirations of the 2030 Agenda, sustainable development and peace. It highlights twelve key aspects of fragility, defying common assumptions and simplistic categorisation. It documents progress made in fragile situations on attaining sustainable development, unveiling exit doors from the fragility trap. It then illustrates the current state of financing to address fragility and suggests more effective approaches, accounting for its multidimensionality. Above all, the report aims to strike a balance between fragility's inherent complexity and the degree of simplicity that is required for efficient policy and decision making, namely through systems-based thinking; longer-term, consistent aid plans; the financing of peace; and a persistent focus on human beings.

The Mercator Dialogue on Asylum and Migration (MEDAM) was established in 2016 to pursue two objectives: to conduct research to improve our understanding of the interrelated challenges facing the EU and its member states in the areas of asylum, migration, and mobility; and to engage European policy makers and civil society in a broad and open debate about comprehensive, implementable solutions to these challenges.
This 2018 MEDAM Assessment Report on Asylum and Migration Policies in Europe is the second in an annual series. The challenges European policymakers face may appear less urgent today than in 2015 or 2016 because fewer irregular immigrants are now arriving in the EU. But each of the main measures that are associated with reducing the number of irregular immigrants - the EU-Turkey agreement, the closure of the Western Balkans migration route, and cooperation with the Libyan coast guard and other problematic actors in Libya - has important shortcomings that call into question their long-term sustainability in their current form.
In this report, we analyze how these policy interventions may be further developed and which complementary measures are needed to create an effective framework of policies to protect refugees, respect the human rights of migrants, and reduce irregular immigration to the EU.
We begin by assessing immediate challenges to EU policies. We apply the notion of ‘flexible solidarity’ to provide guidance on how EU member states may effectively share responsibility for interconnected policies in different areas. We discuss possible responses to the challenges posed by irregular migration across the Mediterranean and explore ways in which EU member states can create more opportunities for legal labor migration from Africa to the EU.

The European Commission and the European Environment Agency (EEA) launched the European Climate Adaptation Platform (Climate-ADAPT) in 2012. Its aim is to provide a common European knowledge base to support the target audience of governmental organisations and those supporting them in developing and implementing climate change adaptation strategies and actions, complementary to adaptation platforms at other levels of governance. The need for such a platform was recognised in the 2013 EU strategy on adaptation to climate change or adaptation strategy, which is being evaluated by the European Commission in 2017-2018, as a key element of better informed decision-making that should be developed further. The objectives of Climate-ADAPT are: to facilitate the collection, sharing and use of information on climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation, and build a consistent and updated knowledge base; to assist the effective uptake of the relevant knowledge by decision-makers; and to contribute to a greater level of coordination among sectors and institutional levels.
Climate-ADAPT is facing a twofold challenge. Firstly, stakeholder demands vary at each governance level related to the specific tasks of decision-makers and have evolved over time. Secondly, the wide range of EU and nationally funded projects, as well as practical experience of adaptation, have significantly enhanced the amount and diversity of adaptation knowledge in Europe to be shared. Furthermore, many other relevant European knowledge platforms have emerged, including those on climate services, biodiversity and ecosystem services, and disaster risk reduction.
This report provides an evaluation of the fulfilment of the Climate-ADAPT objectives. The evaluation was carried out by the EEA as a process evaluation with a focus on learning. It focuses on the three objectives
of the platform mentioned above. The lessons learned from the Climate-ADAPT evaluation may also be of use for other thematic platforms maintained by the EEA, such as those on biodiversity and water, and for climate change adaptation platforms at national and transnational levels.

An assessment of public infrastructure development in the Western Balkans. The paper quantifies the large gaps across various sectors/dimensions, evaluates current infrastructure plans, and discusses funding options available to countries in the region. The paper also identifies important bottlenecks for increased infrastructure investment. Finally, the paper quantifies potential growth benefits from addressing infrastructure gaps, concluding that boosting the quantity and quality of infrastructure is vital for raising economic growth and accelerating income convergence with the EU. The paper concludes with country-specific policy recommendations.

Relations between most of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries and third powers have been visibly intensifying in recent years. China, Turkey, Iran and the Arab states are all a bigger presence in the region than was the case a decade ago. This trend is driven by, on the one hand, the growing economic and foreign policy ambitions of the third powers, and on the other by the EaP countries’ eagerness to expand their economic and diplomatic links with powers other than the EU, US or Russia. Through a strategy of increased engagement with the third powers, these countries are seeking to diversify their trade and foreign policy options, in the process even further diluting what was once primarily a Russian sphere of influence.
This Chaillot Paper examines the geopolitical repercussions of the rising presence of third powers in the region, and how the growing constellation of partnerships between the EaP countries and these powers serves a range of strategic purposes for the actors involved.

The paper makes an analytical contribution to the revived discussion about the euro area’s institutional setup. After significant progress during the eurocrisis, the drive to complete Europe’s Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) had stalled, and the way forward will benefit from an in-depth look at the conceptual issues raised by the evolution and architecture of Europe, and the trade-offs involved. A thorough look at the underlying economic issues suggests that in the long run, EMU will benefit from progressing along three mutually supporting tracks: introduce more fiscal risk sharing, helping to make the sovereign “no bailout” rule credible; complementary financial sector reforms to delink sovereigns and banks; and more effective rules to discourage moral hazard. This evolution would ensure that financial markets provide incentives for fiscal discipline. Introducing more fiscal union comes with myriad legal, technical, operational, and political problems, raising questions well beyond the remit of economics. But without decisive progress to foster fiscal risk sharing, EMU will continue to face existential risks.

This Chaillot Paper examines the relationship between the EU and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). It contends that the original assumptions underpinning EU policy towards the region no longer apply, due to the erosion of the liberal consensus, as well as the ongoing obstacles to regional integration in LAC.
Highlighting the various shortcomings in this bi-regional relationship, the paper argues that focusing on bilateral relations between the EU and individual countries is the way to move forward today, as it is in this sphere that deeper and more concrete cooperation has been strongest. This is because this level of interaction is best suited to accommodate an increasingly diverse region.

While Europe has made substantial progress in the development of its High Performance Computing (HPC) ecosystem in the last few years, the study has identified a significant investment gap, which has led to a setback in its relative global position.
In this context, this study aims to assess the access-to-finance conditions for the development and deployment of HPC. In particular, the study’s specific objectives were to:
• Identify successful commercial business models in the HPC market.
• Assess the financing requirements in key market segments and identify current financing bottlenecks.
• Provide recommendations to bridge the current gap between technology providers/users (demand side for financing) and investors (supply side).
• Explore options for public-private partnerships in financing HPC and propose ways of funding the HPC sector under the current EU financial instruments.

This paper makes the case for smart policy development in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe (CESEE).
It uses European Investment Bank Investment Survey (EIBIS) 2017 results for CESEE cities to outline local infrastructure gaps and demonstrate the productivity and innovation gaps between CESEE cities and other EU cities.
It discusses negative demographic trends in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, and evaluates capital and non-capital regional convergence in CESEE countries.
Introducing a Smart Region Index, to allow the identification of gaps in CESEE regions compared with the EU, it also uses EIBIS to provide further conclusions on obstacles to investment for CESEE municipalities and highlights the importance of the use of EU funds.