The paper makes an analytical contribution to the revived discussion about the euro area’s institutional setup. After significant progress during the euro crisis, 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 tradeoffs 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 book analyses the ongoing reform of the European economic union in the light of the new objective of ‘stability of the euro area as a whole’ in Article 136(3) TFEU. On the basis of the relevant legal sources, it qualifies this objective as the obligation to preserve the existence of the monetary union, the establishment of which was an EU goal laid down in Article 3(4) TEU. While to date the objective has been achieved through fiscal and macroeconomic consolidation in the member states and the activation of stabilisation mechanisms in cases of emergency, the book argues that full stability requires a better system of economic governance, either through a process of partial fiscal centralisation or the return to a more efficient and sustainable market discipline of public finances. It also analyses the concrete legal challenges these raise, including compliance with the conferral principle, the longstanding democratic deficit of the governance and the balance between financial solidarity and fiscal responsibility.

Does the European Union need closer fiscal integration, and in particular a stronger fiscal centre, to become more resilient to economic shocks? This book looks at the experience of 13 federal states to help inform the heated debate on this issue. It analyses in detail their practices in devolving responsibilities from the subnational to the central level, compares them to those of the European Union, and draws lessons for a possible future fiscal union in Europe. More specifically, this book tries to answer three sets of questions: What is the role of centralized fiscal policies in federations, and hence the size, features and functions of the central budget? What institutional arrangements are used to coordinate fiscal policy between the federal and subnational levels? What are the links between federal and subnational debt, and how have subnational financing crises been handled, when they occurred? These policy questions are critical in many federations, and central to the current discussions about future paths for the European Union. This book brings to the table new, practical insights through a systematic and comprehensive comparison of the EU fiscal framework with that of federal states. It also departs from the decentralization perspective that has been prominent in the literature by focusing on the role of the centre (which responsibilities are centralized at the federal level and how they are handled, rather than which functions belong to the local level). Such an approach is particularly relevant for the European Union, where a fiscal union would imply granting new powers to the centre.

The paper makes an analytical contribution to the revived discussion about the euro area’s institutional setup. After significant progress during the euro crisis, 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 tradeoffs 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.

The EU has experienced serious economic and political crises such as the sovereign debt crisis and Brexit in the past few years. However, despite these issues, the EU has implemented considerable institutional, fiscal, and collective improvements during the unification process to continue as a significant actor in the global economy. The Handbook of Research on Social and Economic Development in the European Union provides a multidisciplinary evaluation of the institutional, economic, and social development of the European Union and makes inferences for the future dynamics and collaborations of the EU, the global economy, and other countries. Featuring coverage on a broad range of topics such as energy security, gender discrimination, and global economics, this book is ideally designed for government officials, policymakers, world leaders, politicians, diplomats, international relations officers, economists, business professionals, historians, market analysts, academicians, researchers, and students concerned about the multifaceted integration processes surrounding the EU.

At the height of the Great Depression a number of leading U.S. economists advanced a proposal for monetary reform that became known as the Chicago Plan. It envisaged the separation of the monetary and credit functions of the banking system, by requiring 100% reserve backing for deposits. Irving Fisher (1936) claimed the following advantages for this plan: (1) Much better control of a major source of business cycle fluctuations, sudden increases and contractions of bank credit and of the supply of bank-created money. (2) Complete elimination of bank runs. (3) Dramatic reduction of the (net) public debt. (4) Dramatic reduction of private debt, as money creation no longer requires simultaneous debt creation. We study these claims by embedding a comprehensive and carefully calibrated model of the banking system in a DSGE model of the U.S. economy. We find support for all four of Fisher's claims. Furthermore, output gains approach 10 percent, and steady state inflation can drop to zero without posing problems for the conduct of monetary policy.

This volume explores the concept of sustainable value creation, presenting readers with a wide-ranging analysis integrating different and interacting disciplines.