Flash Paper Series

Our Policy Briefs and Working Papers are the result of brainstorming, discussing and debating the central Research Topics in the PCC-Team. With the goal of a unanimous result, many inputs and sometimes different opinions will not be duly reflected in the outputs. We therefore founded the Flash Paper Series in which specific inputs can be published, and different opinions documented.

Flash Paper 5/2017



Political opposition to globalisation has risen in industrialized countries, although the positive overall effects on the growth of the world economy and the alleviation of poverty are empirically verifiable. However, the effects of globalisation vary according to regions, professional groups, and education. In the period of intensive globalisation, unemployment and inequality have risen, and people feel their lives to be determined by forces they cannot influence. Since the many new challenges, such as climate protection, can be better solved by worldwide efforts, it is indispensable to avoid new national barriers and to strengthen the endorsement of globalisation and the concomitant welfare effects. However, it is also necessary to respect cultural differences in preferences and to view globalisation as a search and learning process. Instruments for the implementation of such a strategy may vary according to regional specifics. Social and ecological goals – gaining higher importance with rising per capita incomes – are well-represented in the European model, but for worldwide solutions other socio-economic models will offer preferences and solutions. Apart from the announced partial withdrawal of the United States from globalisation and the upcoming dominance of China in world affairs and large scale investment, Europe would be well-advised to take a greater responsibility if not the lead in determining the rules of globalisation. Based on an opinion-forming process within Europe, responsible globalisation can significantly improve the quality of life in Europe and its partners worldwide.

Aiginger, K. & Handler, H. (2017), Europe taking the lead in responsible globalisation, Policy Crossover Center: Vienna-Europe, Flash Paper 5/2017, Vienna. 

Flash Paper 4/2017



Die Diskussion über Globalisierung leidet unter extremen Einschätzungen. Eine Gruppe betont nur ihre Vorteile und forciert eine Politik, um Globalisierung auf immer mehr Länder und Tatbestände auszubauen, andere betonen ihre Nachteile und verlangen eine Renationalisierung. Die Diskussion hat durch neue Politikansätze in den USA und China, sowie durch die Kritik an Handelsabkommen, an Bedeutung gewonnen. Leider ist das „Reflexionspapier: Die Globalisierung meistern“ der europäischen Kommission in Analyse und Politikmaßnahmen enttäuschend. Das vorliegende Flash Paper entwirft daher zehn Vorschläge zur wohlfahrtsorientieren Gestaltung der Globalisierung.

Bayer, K. (2017), Keine falschen Alternativen: Globalisierung muss gestaltet werden, Policy Crossover Center: Vienna-Europe, Flash Paper 4/2017, Vienna. 

Flash Paper 3/2017



Die De-Globalisierungsansätze des US-Präsidenten Donald Trump, unter anderem durch die geplante Einschränkung der H-1B-Visaprogramme, führen zu Überlegungen, wie Europa auf diesen Protektionismus reagieren soll. Eine verstärkte Arbeitsmobilität würde dem Problem einer alternden Gesellschaft und folglich einer sinkenden Anzahl an Personen im erwerbsfähigen Alter entgegenwirken. Zusätzlich führt die Immigration langfristig zu gesteigerter Arbeitsproduktivität und zu einem Anstieg des BIP pro Kopf im Zielland. Diese positiven Effekte sollte Europa in Kooperation mit den Herkunftsländern verstärken, sodass alle Beteiligten profitieren. Neben Vorteilen können durch die Arbeitsmigration jedoch auch Nachteile entstehen. Insbesondere dann, wenn sich die Zugewanderten nicht am Arbeitsmarkt integrieren können und in der Arbeitslosigkeit oder dauerhaft im unqualifizierten Sektor verbleiben. Die Aufgabe Europas sollte in diesem Fall darin bestehen, positive Spillover-Effekte zu suchen und zu verstärken.

Kanduth, A. (2017), Wie soll Europa auf die Einschränkung der Arbeitsvisa in den USA reagieren?, Policy Crossover Center: Vienna-Europa, Flash Paper 3/2017, Wien.

Flash Paper 2/2017

How should Europe React to US Corporate Tax Reform Plans?


On April 26, President Trump presented a one page sketch of his long-heralded major tax reform, including some bare bones on corporate taxation. Besides slashing corporate income tax rates to a flat 15 percent and an even lower one-off rate for repatriating offshore funds, the plan remains quiet on the financing side. To balance some of the costs of a substantial tax cut, Congress Republicans have actively advanced a destination-based cash flow tax with border adjustment. This in mind, the EU should be aware of possible threats to its international competitive position. Any reaction should defy a tax race to the bottom and rather resort to early negotiations with US officials on a competition-friendly final version of the tax reform. 

Handler, H. (2017), How should Europe React to US Corporate Tax Reform Plans?, Policy Crossover Center: Vienna - Europe, Flash paper 2/2017, Vienna.  

Flash Paper 1/2017

How a strong Europe could create a more national scope of Action


New challenges can only be overcome internationally. If small countries want to play a role, the European level needs to be consolidated. However, if common solutions are poorly communicated or if there is too much interference in national priorities and individual living conditions, they will be rejected as edicts from Brussels and a return to national solutions will be demanded. In extreme cases, this can lead to exits from the EU; even if this fails to contribute to solving the problem and actually further reduces the available options and the prospects of success.

We highlight that Europe-wide regulations can actually lead to a greater scope of action at the national level. Innovative, problem-specific solutions can be developed based on national priorities due to the fact that international restrictions and leakage effects are eliminated. We demonstrate this in the case of tax regimes, fiscal and climate policy, and for globalization. Best practice examples of European policy which provided funds not feasible at the national level, but at the same time increased the options at the regional or national level and which were more efficient, can be found in the EU‟s regional and research policies. From these, we derive principles for overcoming the contradiction which currently prevails between the need for common rules and the desire for decentralized solutions on the regional or national levels. 

Aiginger, K. (2017), How a strong Europe could create more national scope of action, Policy Crossover Venter: Vienna - Europe, Flash Paper 1/2017, Vienna.