scholarly journals Path to European quantum unicorns

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Markku Räsänen ◽  
Henrikki Mäkynen ◽  
Mikko Möttönen ◽  
Jan Goetz
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Computing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Current Status ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Successful Business ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Quantum Technology ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Future Growth ◽  
The Eu

AbstractQuantum computing holds the potential to deliver great economic prosperity to the European Union (EU). However, the creation of successful business in the field is challenging owing to the required extensive investments into postdoctoral-level workforce and sophisticated infrastructure without an existing market that can financially support these operations.This commentary paper reviews the recent efforts taken in the EU to foster the quantum-computing ecosystem together with its current status. Importantly, we propose concrete actions for the EU to take to enable future growth of this field towards the desired goals. In particular, we suggest ways to enable the creation of EU-based quantum-computing unicorns which may act as key crystallization points of quantum technology and its commercialization. These unicorns may provide stability to the otherwise scattered ecosystem, thus pushing forward global policies enabling the global spread of EU innovations and technologies.The unicorns may act as a conduit, through which the EU-based quantum ecosystem can stand out from similar ecosystems based in Asia and the United States. Such strong companies are required because of the level of investment currently required in the marketplace. This paper suggests methodologies and best practices that can enhance the probability of the creation of the unicorns.Furthermore, we explore future scenarios, in which the unicorns can operate from the EU and to support the EU quantum ecosystem. This exploration is conducted focusing on the steps to be taken and on the impact the companies may have in our opinion.

scholarly journals TRADE POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNDER THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-59
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Mashkara-Choknadiy ◽  
Yuriy Mayboroda
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Social Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The pandemic of COVID-19 has influenced all sectors of social life, including the global economy and trade relations. The year of 2020 was marked with significant changes in internal and foreign economic policy of almost all nations. The purpose of the paper is to study the measures taken by the EU and the USA as the world's leading economies to regulate their foreign trade in the global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The tasks of the study are to show the influence of the crisis on changes of global trade policy in front of the threat to national security. Methodology. The study is based on the results of statistical analysis of data provided the WTO and the UNCTAD. The authors show an analytical assessment of the foreign trade indicators of the EU and the USA. Methods of comparison and generalization were used to formulate conclusions on regulatory trends in foreign trade of the US and the EU. Results allowed identifying specific features and changes in the regulation of foreign trade of the EU and the US, assessing the impact of the pandemic on their foreign trade. It was found that both mentioned players of the world economy have actively introduced both deterrent and liberalization measures during 2020, which were aimed at providing the domestic market with scarce COVID-related goods. The study shows the transition from export restricting to import liberalizing measures in foreign trade policies from the start of pandemic to the late 2020. Practical implications. Understanding and predicting the possible actions of partners (the US and the EU in this case) in the field of foreign trade regulation is an important practical aspect, which has to be taken into account when developing Ukraine's foreign trade policy. Value/originality. The study of foreign trade policy of the world's leading countries allows us to understand the behavior of governments of the countries that are largely dependent on participation in international trade in their development, to draw conclusions about the most common instruments of foreign trade policy in the time of humanitarian and economic crises.

Eu Neonicotinoid Ban Removes Vital Tools in Global Fight Against Pests

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 197-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Blake
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Guidance Document ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
Regulatory Decision ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

In May 2018, the European Union (EU) banned all outdoor uses of three neonicotinoid insecticides due to concerns about adverse effects on pollinators following their use. Neonicotinoids continue to be used in other areas of the world such as North America. However, increasing scrutiny following the European Union decision threatens their availability as a control tool for farmers in these regions too. This article aims to provide an update on the current status of neonicotinoids, including a brief overview of the reasons behind the European regulatory decision, alternative control strategies that are available to farmers, how the situation in Europe might influence what will happen in other regions of the world, and what this means for future regulatory decision-making. The author concludes that the recent neonicotinoid ban in the EU represents an overly conservative approach to pesticide regulation, and in using the Draft Bee Guidance Document, one where the majority of pesticides currently on the market will fail. There is no definitive scientific evidence that neonicotinoids are the primary cause of declines in bees, and although banning these insecticides is the factor that humans have the greatest control over, it represents an overly simplistic solution to a very complex problem, and one that alone may not improve bee health. Whilst extreme pressure from environmental NGOs and politicians have undoubtedly helped shape these decisions, it is imperative that the regulatory process allows scientific innovation to help achieve food security and protect the environment. Ruling against recent lawsuits brought by Syngenta and Bayer CropScience to contest the bans on their respective neonicotinoids, the General Court of the European Union, said that the EU's"precautionary principle" meant that the EU could take measures if there was scientific uncertainty about risks to human health or the environment. The precautionary principle lies at the heart of EU regulation and effectively puts the burden of proof to demonstrate that a pesticide poses no unacceptable risk onto the manufacturers. Given that neonicotinoids are insecticides, and insecticides kill insects, it is not difficult to connect how the use of the precautionary principle led to the neonicotinoid ban. However, this principle is at odds with the desire to innovate – the so-called "Innovation principle" – "whenever policy or regulatory decisions are under consideration the impact on innovation as a driver for jobs and growth should be assessed and addressed". The innovation principle and precautionary principle should be complementary, recognising the need to protect society and the environment while also protecting the EU's ability to innovate. Neonicotinoids represent one such innovation where their highly targeted nature, especially as seed treatments, makes them effective within Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies, in comparison to alternatives such as pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates, that are known to be highly toxic to bees (and other non-target invertebrates) through spray drift. Replacing neonicotinoids with these products will also result in higher overall environmental risks, including risks to taxonomic groups that are not adversely affected by neonicotinoids such as birds, mammals and fish, together with higher risks to humans, particularly applicators. The HFFA report recommends that potential environmental concerns must be balanced against the need to boost agricultural productivity, and if such an assessment results in societal benefits outweighing the costs, then the technology should be applied. The hope is that regulators in other regions of the world will judiciously balance innovation and precaution, and base decisions on science rather than opinion or fear, and thus allow the continued use of neonicotinoids as vital tools in the global fight against crop pests.

17. The European Union and the USA

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Smith ◽  
Rebecca Steffenson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Security Questions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Policy Mechanisms ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the evolution of the European Union's relations with the United States. More specifically, it looks at the ways in which EU–US relations enter into the international relations of the EU as well as the implications for key areas of the EU's growing international activity. The chapter begins with an overview of the changing shape and focus of the EU–US relationship as it enters into economic, political, and security questions. It then considers the impact of EU–US relations on the EU's system of international relations, on the EU's role in the processes of international relations, and on the EU's position as a ‘power’ in international relations. It shows that the EU–US relationship has played a key (and contradictory) role in development of the EU's foreign policy mechanisms.

scholarly journals Various approaches to building of «European Defence» in France

2020 ◽  
pp. 114-136
Author(s):  
Vladimir Chernega ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Eu

The article considers the views existing in France on the prospects of the European Union becoming a «political power» and the appearance in it of its own military instrument. It is noted that, in the opinion of most French politicians, experts and journalists, the EU is still far from being a full-pledged political subject. Although political and military structures are formed in it, as a kind of «embrio» of quasi statehood, and a «neo-imperial» tendency already exists in it, basically the EU is an economic and «civilian» power which must fight for influence on the international arena only with the help of «soft power». The main reason of its weakness is its internal friability, disagreements between Members States over its future. In addition, the United States, which are not interested in a new global rival, are hampering the achievement of the self-sufficiency, especially in the military-political share. NATO, controlled by the USA, can only allow the creation of a «European pillar» under its umbrella. Eastern European countries are against military integration of the EU, because they are oriented not by Brussels, but by Washington in the security field. However, the rise of China and the election of the nationalist Donald Trump as a President of the United States strengthened the trend in the EU advocating its political independence and the creation of its own «European defence». The article analyzes the initiatives and actions of French President Emmanuel Macron who personifies this trend. It is stated that, with the help of Germany, he managed to achieve certain progress both in terms of general integration and in the field of «European defence». This allowed him to speak about the formation of a «European army». But the question of whether he will be able to go further remains open. Besides the obstacles to political and military integration, which did not disappear, the coronavirus pandemic introduces its «corrections». The newly discovered split in the EU into «South» and «North» called into question its already fragile construction.

scholarly journals PROBLEMS OF EU-CHINA RELATIONS IN SOLVING THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM'S ISSUE

2021 ◽  
pp. 151-166
Author(s):  
O.Y. Cheban ◽  
A.S. Kraskova
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Weapons ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Security ◽  
Nuclear Program ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Us ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

It is proven in the paper that the chosen topic is relevant due to the impact of China and the EU on the negotiations about the regulation of the Iranian nuclear program’s issue. In the article, it is done a comparative analysis of the policy of the EU and China regarding the regulation of the Iranian nuclear program’s problem. It is also mentioned in the paper that since the time of the US presidential administration of Donald Trump, the EU and China have been seen as valuable actors in resolving the Iranian nuclear program’s issue. For this reason, the main purpose of the work is a review of the influence that China’s and EU’s policies regarding the development of the nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) exert on European security. The history of China-Iran relations in the nuclear sphere and the important role of China in the development of the Iranian nuclear program is mentioned in the paper. It is also noted that the fact that the EU countries are partners or allies of the United States, which is the main rival of the IRI, has complicated the dialogue between the European Union and Iran. It is shown in the paper that during Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s presidency, the Iranian nuclear program was not controlled by the international community, and because of that China supported sanctions of the UN Security Council against Iran. As it is mentioned in the article, until the end of the 2000s, the EU, as well as the People’s Republic of China (PRC), did not support the US policy toward Iran. The Iranian-Chinese relations in the nuclear field were studied. It is mentioned that despite the fact that China is interested in exporting Iranian energy resources, Beijing will never accept Iran’s possession of nuclear weapons. It is assumed that the fact that China does not support the nuclear weapons status of Iran gives it the opportunity to cooperate with the EU in case Iran decides to acquire nuclear weapons. It is noticed that China had a major impact on the negotiations related to signing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), i. e. the nuclear agreement with Iran. The further actions of the EU and the PRC after the dissolution of the JCPOA are mentioned in the paper. The scenarios of further development of the situation around the Iranian nuclear program were reviewed. As a result of the research, it is concluded that China and the EU have played a significant role in achieving the JCPOA and conducting diplomatic negotiations with Iran. The strengthening of Beijing’s role as a key partner of Teheran and the decrease of the EU’s impact on Iran’s foreign policy were mentioned in the paper.

Administrative Law and Multi-Level Administration: An EU and US Comparison

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 211-246
Author(s):  
Catherine Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Us States ◽  
The Us ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe aim of this chapter is to assess what, if anything, administrative law can demonstrate about multi-level administration in the European Union and the United States. The particular focus of the examination is not on the content of administrative law in each legal order, but rather on the impact of EU and US federal administrative law on the Member States and US States respectively. It will be seen that, while US federal administrative law has primarily only influential effect on US States, EU administrative law is often binding on Member States. This observation challenges presumptions often made, particularly in political science, as to the degrees of inter-penetration in administration in the EU and the US. It will be argued that the cause of divergence is largely derived from differing judicial attitudes as to the fundamental tenets of the co-operation between the different levels of administration, and indeed, more general understandings of federalism in the two jurisdictions. In this way, this study also provides a useful prism through which to consider integration in the EU and US more broadly.

The European Union and the Globalisation of Criminal Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 337-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valsamis Mitsilegas
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
External Context ◽  
European Values ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn the new post-Cold War security era, there is a perception that the nature of cross-border security threats has changed. The need to respond to these new threats has led to a proliferation of multilateral international and regional treaties in this area, as well as unilateral demands made by the United States post-9/11. We have, then, seen a process of globalisation of criminal law, a field traditionally linked to State sovereignty. This chapter examines, first, EU action with regard to UN multilateral conventions and the impact of those conventions on internal EU law, as well as the impact of EU action within the framework of the regional treaties of the Council of Europe; secondly, the interrelationship between Union law and the global production of norms in criminal matters by the UN Security Council and by the Financial Action Task Force; thirdly, bilateral cooperation between the EU and the US, in particular in connection with the transfer of Passenger Name Records data; fourthly, the question of compliance by the EU in this area, in both the internal and the external context; and, fifthly, the Court of Justice’s approach to the protection of fundamental rights when global criminal law is engaged. The EU has managed to take centre stage in international developments in the field of global criminal law through a clear commitment to multilateral negotiations as well as a clear political will to implement at the Union level norms agreed internationally without a high degree of transparency. The Court of Justice has also been reluctant to overturn Union security decisions in the name of fundamental rights. The coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty will eliminate some complexity in this area, but not all, and it still remains to be seen whether in the process of globalisation of criminal law the European values proclaimed in Article 2 of the new EU Treaty will be promoted or compromised.

Japan and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hitoshi Suzuki ◽  
Yu Suzuki ◽  
Yoshimi Igawa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Mutual Cooperation ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Japan and the European Union have historically developed relations, from trade conflicts to mutual cooperation between global actors. Japan’s prewar attitude and postwar rapid reconstruction caused misunderstandings and frictions, but these were gradually overcome thanks to the efforts made by Japan, the European Commission and member state governments. After the Cold War ended, policy fields of cooperation expanded from “mutual” market liberalization to foreign direct investments, aid, security, and environment. Japan and the EU jointly aided the newly liberalized countries in Central Eastern Europe, while the EU sought to strengthen its relations with countries in the Asia-Pacific. The Japan–EU Economic Partnership Agreement and the Strategic Partnership Agreement of 2018 were signed on the 50th anniversary of the customs union. The Agreements are jointly aimed by both parties to foster global free trade and shared values. For the first time in postwar history, Japan and the EU had reached an agreement before achieving one with the United States. Japan–EU relations are the strongest they have been since 1959 when the Japanese Mission to the European Communities and the European Commission Delegation to Japan were established. But the security threats in the Pacific indicate that bilateral relations between Japan and member states—the United Kingdom and France at the forefront—are still in play. The impact of Brexit, estimated to be felt more on the Japanese side, is also an issue requiring close study.

Administrative Law and Multi-Level Administration: An EU and US Comparison

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 211-246
Author(s):  
Catherine Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Us States ◽  
The Us ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Eu And Us ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The aim of this chapter is to assess what, if anything, administrative law can demonstrate about multi-level administration in the European Union and the United States. The particular focus of the examination is not on the content of administrative law in each legal order, but rather on the impact of EU and US federal administrative law on the Member States and US States respectively. It will be seen that, while US federal administrative law has primarily only influential effect on US States, EU administrative law is often binding on Member States. This observation challenges presumptions often made, particularly in political science, as to the degrees of inter-penetration in administration in the EU and the US. It will be argued that the cause of divergence is largely derived from differing judicial attitudes as to the fundamental tenets of the co-operation between the different levels of administration, and indeed, more general understandings of federalism in the two jurisdictions. In this way, this study also provides a useful prism through which to consider integration in the EU and US more broadly.

The European Union and the Globalisation of Criminal Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 337-407
Author(s):  
Valsamis Mitsilegas
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
External Context ◽  
European Values ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In the new post-Cold War security era, there is a perception that the nature of cross-border security threats has changed. The need to respond to these new threats has led to a proliferation of multilateral international and regional treaties in this area, as well as unilateral demands made by the United States post-9/11. We have, then, seen a process of globalisation of criminal law, a field traditionally linked to State sovereignty. This chapter examines, first, EU action with regard to UN multilateral conventions and the impact of those conventions on internal EU law, as well as the impact of EU action within the framework of the regional treaties of the Council of Europe; secondly, the interrelationship between Union law and the global production of norms in criminal matters by the UN Security Council and by the Financial Action Task Force; thirdly, bilateral cooperation between the EU and the US, in particular in connection with the transfer of Passenger Name Records data; fourthly, the question of compliance by the EU in this area, in both the internal and the external context; and, fifthly, the Court of Justice’s approach to the protection of fundamental rights when global criminal law is engaged. The EU has managed to take centre stage in international developments in the field of global criminal law through a clear commitment to multilateral negotiations as well as a clear political will to implement at the Union level norms agreed internationally without a high degree of transparency. The Court of Justice has also been reluctant to overturn Union security decisions in the name of fundamental rights. The coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty will eliminate some complexity in this area, but not all, and it still remains to be seen whether in the process of globalisation of criminal law the European values proclaimed in Article 2 of the new EU Treaty will be promoted or compromised.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document