The state of financial knowledge in the European Union. Policy Brief Issue 04/24, February 2024.

Only one in two individuals in the European Union, on average, is financially knowledgeable. In response to a 2023 survey containing five questions assessing basic financial knowledge, only half of the respondents answered at least three of the five questions correctly. This represents a low level of financial knowledge and an obstacle for individuals to invest in financial markets. The questions most often answered correctly by respondents measured understanding of inflation and the relationship between risk and return. By contrast, only one in five respondents answered a question on the relationship between interest rates and bond prices correctly. Regarding inflation, there is a large difference between the least and most educated respondents in terms of answering the relevant question correctly. Gaps in understanding the concept of inflation are also evident between the youngest (18-24) and oldest respondents (55+) and between the poorest and richest households. A gender gap is present in financial knowledge, with 18 percentage points more men than women answering at least three out of five questions correctly, on average in the EU. Those with greater financial knowledge are less financially fragile in that they can still cover their expenses if there is a sudden loss of income, and are more confident that they will have sufficient funds to sustain themselves during retirement. Countries with higher proportions of people who are financially knowledgeable have higher numbers of people who both save with and borrow from financial institutions, an indication that financial knowledge may improve financial inclusion. All EU countries have, or are in the process of putting together, a national financial literacy strategy. There is an urgent need to roll out these strategies, to monitor progress over time and to establish best practices. Particular attention needs to be given to how financial knowledge interacts with digital skills as financial services are increasingly digitalised. Financial literacy strategies should also help close gender and other gaps in knowledge among vulnerable groups, and should ensure that financial education starts early and in schools

Exposure to generative artificial intelligence in the European labour market. Bruegel Working Paper, Issue 06/2024, 07 MARCH 2024.

We apply two sets of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) occupational exposure scores – one task-based, one ability-based – to the European Labour Force Survey. While using different methodologies, our findings reveal consistent demographic patterns across the two approaches: jobs held by women, highly educated and younger workers are more exposed to GenAI technology in Europe. We also review the literature on the recent productivity impact of GenAI. Within the same occupations, less-experienced or less-skilled workers consistently get the largest productivity gains from GenAI support. We argue that a task-based analysis is more fruitful than an ability-based one, both for guiding GenAI adoption in organisations and their workplaces, and for assessing the employment and job quality impact on workers. Finally, we provide policy recommendations that can help workers (ie the labour supply) adjust to technological disruption, such as providing training and social safety nets. But we go further by also suggesting policy interventions that could redirect future labour demand towards better jobs, by promoting job redesign and organisational agility. Monitoring GenAI’s employment effects and researching the ‘jagged technological frontier’ is necessary to further build our understanding of the employment impact of this transformational technology

Global supply chains: lessons from a decade of disruption. Bruegel Working Paper Issue 05/2024, 04 March 2024.

This paper explores both the character and impact of three recent shocks to global supply chains: the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the US-China trade war. These were large shocks which have had significant impacts on domestic and international supply chains, but these impacts have differed in their longevity, economic impact and policy responses. We show that supply chains were remarkably resilient against shocks of such magnitude. However, this resilience was also achieved thanks to the equally remarkable size and scope of policy responses and global supply chain reorganisation. We recommend that pre-emptive policies may be justified to shield households and industry from future shocks. Given the entangled nature of these shocks and that their effects continue to reverberate, we emphasise the need for extensive future research to understand the nature of these shocks and the effectiveness of policy responses

Incorporating the impact of social investments and reforms in the European Union’s new fiscal framework. Bruegel Working Papers, March 2024.

The European Union’s new fiscal framework aims to incentivise public investment and reforms by offering the option to extend the four-year fiscal adjustment period to seven years, thereby lowering the average annual fiscal adjustment requirement. EU countries can propose investment and reforms in the context of their national medium-term fiscal structural plans. When they do, these investments and reforms can be expected to also inform the fiscal adjustment proposed by member states. Yet, the EU lacks an agreed methodology for deciding on the potential quantitative impact of investment and reforms on the fiscal adjustment required under the new rules. This paper first analyses the ‘investment friendliness’ of the new framework. Although the incentives offered for raising investment are powerful, the bar for extending the adjustment period mainly through higher investment is high, and the design of the new rules will make it hard to actually raise investment. We next propose an approach for quantifying the impact of investment and reform on debt sustainability in the context of the new framework, taking into account uncertainty about their implementation and their economic effects. Such a methodology would also help the European Commission evaluate the impacts of recently adopted measures, the impacts of which are not yet observable. Developing this methodology will require revisiting the current commonly agreed methodologies for medium- and long-term capital stock and total factor productivity projections. We illustrate the potential impact of investment on debt sustainability analyses through calculations on three social investment measures, that is, combinations of reform and public spending that aim to increase human capital and labour force participations. While the impact of individual reforms on fiscal adjustment needs is generally modest, the combined impact of several measures could be notable

How can the European Union adapt to climate change? Bruegel Policy Contribution Issue n˚11/22 | June 2022.

Europe must increasingly deal with the harmful impacts of climate change, regardless of its success in reducing emissions. These impacts have significant cross-border effects and threaten to deepen existing divisions. Cooperation on adaptation, which is mostly seen as requiring local or regional efforts, may be useful, but the role of the European Union is ill-defined. We give an overview of how climate change might change Europe and how it might affect people and the economy. We also discuss what sort of adaptation policies are being pursued at EU level and on what grounds. We argue that a stronger adaptation governance framework would benefit adaptation efforts. We formulate three ideas to strengthen adaptation. First is a three-layered governance framework based on intensive cooperation to establish binding adaptation plans. Second is an EU-level insurance scheme against damages from climate change, with the size of national contributions tied to the achievement of self-chosen targets in adaptation plans. Our final suggestion is to increase ex-ante adaptation funding by targeting more spending under EU regional and agricultural policies specifically to adaptation in the most vulnerable regions

Measuring macroeconomic uncertainty during the euro’s lifetime. WORKING PAPER | ISSUE 10/2022 | 20 JUNE 2022.

To measure macroeconomic uncertainty, we start from observable forecasts of macroeconomic variables, which are transformations of underlying economic conditions. By observing how forecasts change over time, we measure the flow of macroeconomic surprises. The more intense the flow of surprises, the greater uncertainty can be said to be. Greater differences among forecasts are also evidence of uncertainty. We draw out four indicators of macroeconomic uncertainty, measured over the lifetime of the euro: 1. How the macroeconomic forecasts of a given institution for the same time period change over time; 2. How the macroeconomic forecasts of a given institution deviate from realised outcomes; 3. How the macroeconomic forecasts of different institutions deviate from one other; 4. How dispersed the forecasts of different professionals are. We also measure whether the ‘stag-‘ or the ‘-flationary’ component is stronger in the overall stagflationary shock caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine

The impact of artificial intelligence on the nature and quality of jobs. Bruegel WORKING PAPER | ISSUE 14/2022 | 27 JULY 2022.

Artificial intelligence (AI), like any workplace technology, changes the division of labour in an organisation and the resulting design of jobs. When used as an automation technology, AI changes the bundle of tasks that make up an occupation. In this case, implications for job quality depend on the (re)composition of those tasks. When AI automates management tasks, known as algorithmic management, the consequences extend into workers’ control over their work, with impacts on their autonomy, skill use and workload. We identify four use cases of algorithmic management that impact the design and quality of jobs: algorithmic work-method instructions; algorithmic scheduling of shifts and tasks; algorithmic surveillance, evaluation and discipline; and algorithmic coordination across tasks. Reviewing the existing empirical evidence on automation and algorithmic management shows significant impact on job quality across a wide range of jobs and employment settings. While each AI use case has its own particular effects on job demands and resources, the effects tend to be more negative for the more prescriptive (as opposed to supportive) use cases. These changes in job design demonstrably affect the social and physical environment of work and put pressure on contractual employment conditions as well. As technology development is a product of power in organisations, it replicates existing power dynamics in society. Consequently, disadvantaged groups suffer more of the negative consequences of AI, risking further job-quality polarisation across socioeconomic groups. Meaningful worker participation in the adoption of workplace AI is critical to mitigate the potentially negative effects of AI adoption on workers, and can help achieve fair and transparent AI systems with human oversight. Policymakers should strengthen the role of social partners in the adoption of AI technology to protect workers’ bargaining power

A gender perspective on artificial intelligence and jobs: The vicious cycle of digital inequality. Bruegel WORKING PAPER | ISSUE 15/2022 | 30 AUGUST 2022.

The worldwide artificial intelligence market is expected to increase enormously in the next few years. Because of AI’s immense potential, virtually all industries will be affected by the implementation of AI systems, resulting in the digitalisation and automation of work processes. This will cause disruptive shifts in labour markets, in terms of the number and profiles of jobs in industries as well as worker skill requirements. We take a gender perspective and analyse how gender stereotypes and gendered work segregation on the one hand, and digitalisation and automation (as a consequence of AI implementation) on the other hand, are entangled and result in a vicious cycle of digital gender inequality. We provide insights into the gender-specific impact of AI technologies, which is relevant for the mitigation of the potential risk of the creation of social inequality and exclusion. We show that existing empirical evidence already indicates that AI will not increase gender equality but will somewhat further exacerbate the gender inequality in labour markets, ranging from further horizontal and vertical occupational gender segregation to an increase in the gender pay gap. We summarise policy guidance and measures to decrease gender inequality in the future

Mapping banking centres globally since 1970. Bruegel WORKING PAPER | ISSUE 12/2022 | 12 JULY 2022.

Brexit and the rise of China as a leading international economic power have revived discussions about the geography of banking centres. This paper analyses the geographical evolution of banking centres since the 1970s, based on a database constructed from a ranking of the top banks in the world created by The Banker magazine, a UK-based monthly publication specialised in international financial affairs. We describe both how the database was created and the ways in which it can be used to inform policy on money and capital markets. We address why the data can be used to proxy the size of International Financial Centres (IFCs) and the methodological limitations it may present. We find that banking consolidations and the evolution of the legal framework are more central to the changing geography of banking centres than economic and financial crises. We also highlight that, despite major shifts in global economic power, leading banking centres are hard to replace

Shortening the settlement cycle: Why Europe should not wait too long to introduce T+1. ECMI Commentary no 77 | January 2022.

The amount of time required for the settlement of securities is a long-running issue for European capital markets. Twenty years ago, the Giovannini Group looked at the large number of securities settlement systems that existed in Europe (and still do). In 2014, based on the Group’s proposals for improving the settlement cycle, the EU moved from T+3 (trade date plus three business days) to T+2 (trade date plus two business days), with the US following a few years later in 2017. The US is now ready to shorten its settlement cycle further to T+1 by 2024, and the question of whether the EU should follow cannot be ignored for too much longer. However, the significant problems caused by the diversity and fragmentation of the EU’s capital markets and market infrastructures would have to be solved first