Keep knowledgeable with free updates
Merely signal as much as the EU commerce myFT Digest — delivered on to your inbox.
The author is a former president of the European Central Financial institution and was prime minister of Italy. He oversaw a report on the way forward for European competitiveness
Current weeks have offered a stark reminder of Europe’s vulnerabilities. The eurozone barely grew on the finish of final yr, underlining the fragility of the home restoration. And the US started imposing tariffs on its main buying and selling companions, with the EU subsequent in its sights. This prospect casts additional uncertainty over European progress given the financial system’s dependence on overseas demand.
Two main elements have led Europe into this predicament — however they’ll additionally lead it out once more whether it is ready to bear radical change.
The primary is the EU’s long-standing incapacity to deal with its provide constraints, particularly its excessive inner limitations and regulatory hurdles. These are much more damaging for progress than any tariffs the US may impose — and their dangerous results are growing over time.
The IMF estimates that Europe’s inner limitations are equal to a tariff of 45 per cent for manufacturing and 110 per cent for providers. These successfully shrink the market wherein European firms function: commerce throughout EU international locations is lower than half the extent of commerce throughout US states. And as exercise shifts extra in the direction of providers, their general drag on progress turns into worse.
On the identical time, the EU has allowed regulation to trace essentially the most progressive a part of providers — digital — hindering the expansion of European tech companies and stopping the financial system from unlocking massive productiveness good points. The prices of complying with GDPR, for instance, are estimated to have lowered income for small European tech companies by as much as 12 per cent.
Taken collectively, Europe has been successfully elevating tariffs inside its borders and growing regulation on a sector that makes up round 70 per cent of EU GDP.
This failure to decrease inner limitations has additionally contributed to Europe’s unusually excessive commerce openness. Since 1999, commerce as a share of GDP has risen from 31 per cent to 55 per cent within the eurozone, whereas in China it rose from 34 per cent to 37 per cent and within the US from 23 per cent to simply 25 per cent. This openness was an asset in a globalising world. However now it has change into a vulnerability.
The paradox is that whereas inner limitations remained excessive, exterior limitations fell as globalisation accelerated. EU firms appeared overseas to substitute for lack of home progress and imports grew to become comparatively extra enticing.
As an illustration, because the mid-Nineteen Nineties, commerce prices in providers are estimated to have dropped by 11 per cent inside the EU however by 16 per cent for non-EU imports. This helps clarify why commerce in providers inside and outdoors the EU is about the identical at the moment as a share of GDP — unthinkable in a totally built-in massive financial system.
The second issue holding Europe again is its tolerance of persistently weak demand, at the very least because the international monetary disaster of 2008. This has exacerbated all the problems brought on by provide constraints. Till the disaster, home demand as a share of GDP within the eurozone was close to the center of the vary of superior economies. Afterwards, it fell to the underside and stayed there. The US has remained on the prime all through.
This widening demand hole has helped flip excessive commerce openness into excessive commerce surpluses: the eurozone present account has shifted from broadly balanced till 2008 to persistent surpluses thereafter.
And weak demand has fed again into exceptionally weak complete issue productiveness progress after recessions, a sample not seen within the US. This will partly be defined by the impact of demand on the innovation cycle. Analysis finds that policy-driven demand shocks have a major impact on R&D funding, particularly for disruptive applied sciences.
Whereas the demand hole has completely different drivers, essentially the most important has been the relative stance of fiscal insurance policies. From 2009 to 2024, measured in 2024 euros, the US authorities injected over 5 instances extra funds into the financial system through major deficits — €14tn versus €2.5tn within the eurozone.
Each these shortcomings — provide and demand — are largely of Europe’s personal making. They’re subsequently inside its energy to alter. An unyielding drive to take away provide constraints would assist progressive sectors to develop and, by redirecting demand again into the home market, cut back commerce openness with out elevating commerce limitations. The European Fee’s new Competitiveness Compass supplies a highway map to attain this.
On the identical time, extra proactive use of fiscal coverage — within the type of greater productive funding — would assist decrease commerce surpluses and ship a robust sign to companies to speculate extra in R&D.
However this path requires a elementary change in mindset. To this point, Europe has centered on both single or nationwide objectives with out counting their collective value. Conserving public cash supported the purpose of debt sustainability. The unfold of regulation was designed to guard residents from new know-how dangers. Inner limitations are a legacy of instances when the nation state was the pure body for motion.
However it’s now clear that performing on this manner has delivered neither welfare for Europeans, nor wholesome public funds, nor even nationwide autonomy, which is threatened by stress from overseas. That’s the reason radical change is required.
