新的欧洲金融发展架构:变化还是持续?

J. Orbie, Anissa Bougrea, Mattias Vermeiren
{"title":"新的欧洲金融发展架构:变化还是持续?","authors":"J. Orbie, Anissa Bougrea, Mattias Vermeiren","doi":"10.54648/eerr2022026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After years of discussions, the European Union’s (EU’s) new development finance architecture finally came into being under the umbrella of the ‘Status Quo Plus’. This article aims to, firstly, bring much-needed clarification in the nebulous landscape of EU development finance; and secondly, gain a more profound understanding of recent changes by examining to what extent they witness change or continuity. Based on a large variety of empirical data and secondary literature, we find that EU development finance has witnessed significant institutional changes while ideological trends are continued. Institutionally, we elaborate on the simplification of instruments, a shift in their accessibility – in favour of national development agencies and private actors whereby the European Investment Bank (EIB) loses its monopoly on commercial guarantees – and a reshuffling of power play in favour of the European Commission and (larger) EU Member States. In terms of policy content and underlying ideology, however, we observe a deepening of the trend towards financialization within EU (development finance) institutions which ties in with the geopoliticization of aid. We conclude that the ‘Plus’ represents institutional change that nevertheless primarily served (intentionally or not) to support a continuing ideological commitment to selling development finance to the market. The conclusions summarize the main findings and formulate suggestions for further research.\nEuropean Union (EU), development, financialization, geopoliticization, private finance, European Investment Bank (EIB), blending, public development banks","PeriodicalId":84710,"journal":{"name":"European foreign affairs review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The New European Financial Architecture for Development: Change or Continuity?\",\"authors\":\"J. Orbie, Anissa Bougrea, Mattias Vermeiren\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/eerr2022026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After years of discussions, the European Union’s (EU’s) new development finance architecture finally came into being under the umbrella of the ‘Status Quo Plus’. This article aims to, firstly, bring much-needed clarification in the nebulous landscape of EU development finance; and secondly, gain a more profound understanding of recent changes by examining to what extent they witness change or continuity. Based on a large variety of empirical data and secondary literature, we find that EU development finance has witnessed significant institutional changes while ideological trends are continued. Institutionally, we elaborate on the simplification of instruments, a shift in their accessibility – in favour of national development agencies and private actors whereby the European Investment Bank (EIB) loses its monopoly on commercial guarantees – and a reshuffling of power play in favour of the European Commission and (larger) EU Member States. In terms of policy content and underlying ideology, however, we observe a deepening of the trend towards financialization within EU (development finance) institutions which ties in with the geopoliticization of aid. We conclude that the ‘Plus’ represents institutional change that nevertheless primarily served (intentionally or not) to support a continuing ideological commitment to selling development finance to the market. The conclusions summarize the main findings and formulate suggestions for further research.\\nEuropean Union (EU), development, financialization, geopoliticization, private finance, European Investment Bank (EIB), blending, public development banks\",\"PeriodicalId\":84710,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European foreign affairs review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European foreign affairs review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2022026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

经过多年的讨论,欧盟(EU)新的发展融资架构终于在“现状+”的保护伞下形成。本文的目的是,首先,对欧盟发展融资的模糊图景进行亟需的澄清;其次,通过考察他们见证了多大程度的变化或连续性,对最近的变化有了更深刻的理解。基于大量的实证数据和二手文献,我们发现欧盟发展金融经历了重大的制度变迁,而意识形态趋势仍在继续。在制度上,我们详细阐述了工具的简化,其可获得性的转变- -有利于国家发展机构和私人行为者,从而欧洲投资银行(EIB)失去其对商业担保的垄断- -以及有利于欧洲委员会和(较大的)欧盟成员国的权力游戏的重新洗牌。然而,就政策内容和潜在意识形态而言,我们观察到欧盟(发展金融)机构内部金融化趋势的深化,这与援助的地缘政治化有关。我们的结论是,“Plus”代表了制度变革,但主要服务于(有意或无意)支持向市场出售发展融资的持续意识形态承诺。结论部分总结了研究的主要发现,并提出了进一步研究的建议。欧盟,发展,金融化,地缘政治,私人金融,欧洲投资银行,混合,公共开发银行
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The New European Financial Architecture for Development: Change or Continuity?
After years of discussions, the European Union’s (EU’s) new development finance architecture finally came into being under the umbrella of the ‘Status Quo Plus’. This article aims to, firstly, bring much-needed clarification in the nebulous landscape of EU development finance; and secondly, gain a more profound understanding of recent changes by examining to what extent they witness change or continuity. Based on a large variety of empirical data and secondary literature, we find that EU development finance has witnessed significant institutional changes while ideological trends are continued. Institutionally, we elaborate on the simplification of instruments, a shift in their accessibility – in favour of national development agencies and private actors whereby the European Investment Bank (EIB) loses its monopoly on commercial guarantees – and a reshuffling of power play in favour of the European Commission and (larger) EU Member States. In terms of policy content and underlying ideology, however, we observe a deepening of the trend towards financialization within EU (development finance) institutions which ties in with the geopoliticization of aid. We conclude that the ‘Plus’ represents institutional change that nevertheless primarily served (intentionally or not) to support a continuing ideological commitment to selling development finance to the market. The conclusions summarize the main findings and formulate suggestions for further research. European Union (EU), development, financialization, geopoliticization, private finance, European Investment Bank (EIB), blending, public development banks
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信