Europe’s current economic situation has striking parallels with the 1970s oil price shocks. In this post, Professor Waltraud Schelkle (Political and Social Sciences/Schuman Centre) explains why central banks are reluctant to fight inflation resolutely now: their fixation on asset markets as the metric for successful stabilisation.

Debates at COP27 remind us that intergenerational justice is gaining political salience – despite the concept’s elusive and contested meanings. In this post, Law PhD candidate Daniel Bertram summarises the recent revival of intergenerational claims in lawsuits around the globe and argues for an expanded view of future generations.

At COP27, the world’s leaders are discussing the need to speed up climate action. In this post, Policy Leader Fellows Petra Krylova and Alejandro Saez Reale examine the association between people’s perceptions of climate change risks and good governance, using the global Climate Perceptions Index.

The Commission’s proposed European Media Freedom Act is a major step towards protecting information as a public good. Danielle Borges and Roberta Carlini, of the EUI’s Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom, explain the Act’s key tools for counteracting market concentration and non-transparency.

With the proposed European Media Freedom Act, the Commission pushes EU competence boundaries into a traditionally national domain. Iva Nenadić and Elda Brogi of the EUI’s Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom explain how this legislation came to be and what it means for media freedom and pluralism.

The 2022 Nobel prize in economics went to three scholars – one of them a former Chairman of the Fed – who study banking crises and their real-economy repercussions. Professor Thorsten Beck, Director of the Florence School of Banking and Finance, explains why their insights remain critical for policymakers today.

The promised benefits of AI-assisted courts pose myriad challenges to the fundamental principle of judicial independence, explains CIVICA Visiting Scholar Giulia Gentile. Judicial data stored or processed by foreign providers, or liability regimes covering judges and technicians are just some of the devilish details.

This response to John Mearsheimer’s recent lecture at the EUI delves into the validity of his central thesis, the quality of the evidence, the broader implications and the concept of academic social responsibility. It finds that Mearsheimer’s explanation of the war in Ukraine is unsatisfactory and rests on shaky empirical foundations.

The authors conducted a 16-country survey to identify what reforms matter most to EU citizens. They found support for existing policies on climate change, immigration and corporation tax, and some support for more institutional integration. Decision-making by unanimity is unpopular.

There is no justification for the atrocities committed by Russia against the people of Ukraine. This does not stop scholars from trying to explain Putin’s decision to invade. John Mearsheimer’s recent lecture at the EUI was one such attempt – which fails on multiple counts, the authors argue.