Suchergebnisse

This comment aims at critically analyzing some of the economic efficiency issues that are raised in the paper by Muñoz et al. [2007. Harmonization of renewable electricity feed-in laws in the European Union. Energy Policy 35, 3104-3114] on the harmonization of feed-in law schemes for renewable electricity in the European Union. We comment on the choice between green certificate systems and feed-in laws, but pay particular attention to the implementation and design of a harmonized feed-in law scheme. In the comment we argue first that the approach suggested by Muñoz et al. tends to downplay many of the practical difficulties in assessing the real costs facing investors in renewable electricity, not the least since the presence of regulatory uncertainty about the marginal costs of renewable electricity may be essential for the choice between different support systems. Concerning the benefit side of renewable electricity promotion, the Muñoz et al. (2007) paper builds on an interpretation of the EU Renewables Directive that provides plenty of room for national priorities and that therefore essentially implies that harmonized support premiums per se are of little value. We argue instead that a harmonized system should primarily address the international spillover effects from renewable electricity promotion, not the least those related to improved security of supply in Europe. There exists then a strong case for disregarding the specific national benefits of renewable electricity production in the design of harmonized support systems, and for instead considering international-perhaps at the start bilateral-policy support coordination based on entirely uniform support levels. ; Validerad; 2008; 20080211 (patrik_s)

Survey Data Harmonization in the Social Sciences An expansive and incisive overview of the practical uses of harmonization and its implications for data quality and costs. In Survey Data Harmonization in the Social Sciences, a team of distinguished social science researchers delivers a comprehensive collection of ex-ante and ex-post harmonization methodologies in the context of specific longitudinal and cross-national survey projects. The book examines how ex-ante and ex-post harmonization work individually and in relation to one another, offering practical guidance on harmonization decisions in the preparation of new data infrastructure for comparative research. Contributions from experts in sociology, political science, demography, economics, health, and medicine are included, all of which give voice to discipline-specific and interdisciplinary views on methodological challenges inherent in harmonization. The authors offer perspectives from Europe and the United States, as well as Africa, the latter of which provides insights rarely featured in survey research methodology handbooks. Readers will also find: A thorough introduction to approaches and concepts for survey data harmonization, as well as the effects of data harmonization on the overall survey research process. Comprehensive explorations of ex-ante harmonization of survey instruments and non-survey data. Practical discussions of ex-post harmonization of national social surveys, census and time use data, including explorations of survey data recycling. A detailed overview of statistical issues linked to the use of harmonized survey data. Perfect for upper undergraduate and graduate researchers who specialize in survey methodology, Survey Data Harmonization in the Social Sciences will also earn a place in the libraries of survey practitioners who engage in international research.

Issues and opportunities for RDA harmonization within the SEA region were first raised during the First Regional Forum and Workshop "RDAs: Scientific Basis and Future Directions", held in Singapore in March 1997. A regional review on RDAs in SEA showed general similarities for the different RDAs, although in some cases a country listed an exceptionally high or low RDA for a particular nutrient for a specific group. It also revealed differences in physiologic groupings and reference body weights, nutrients included and units of expression. Realizing these differences in RDA components between countries which makes technical composition different, a consensus on the need for regional collaboration and harmonization of RDAs was reached by participants from Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. A follow-up workshop was organized to work towards agreement throughout the region on common approaches, concepts and terminologies; application and uses, format and a research agenda. Round table discussions were held to arrive at specific recommendations for achieving harmonization. While divergence in opinions were expected, some clear-cut agreements were settled. Globalization envisions to achieve economic growth and development, with the effects expected to ripple through health, nutrition and welfare improvements. The harmonization of RDAs in SEA seeks to reach this vision by strengthening R and D capabilities (both logistic and manpower) within the region and within the countries in the region, as well as harmonizing the efforts of governments and industry within the region to reduce potential trade barriers such as those relating to food and nutrition quality assurance standards.

Tax policy in the European Union consists of two components: direct taxation, which remains the sole responsibility of Member States, and indirect taxation, which affects free movement of goods and the freedom to provide services. The most important efforts for the tax harmonization were made in the domain of the indirect taxation, the consumption taxes influence the price supported by the final consumer and prevent the fiscal neutrality necessary for a fair competition on the communitary market. The paper aims to present the excises harmonization stage within the European Union. The analyze concerns taxation basis, excises rates, circulation of excises bearers products between the members states.

This paper analyzes the costs of (partial) institutional harmonization with the EU acquis which countries of the former USSR are expected to conduct under their Partnership and Cooperation Agreements with the EU and European Neighborhood Policy Action Plans. The public sector will have to take an effort of the transposition and adaptation of EU norms, as well as ensuring that they are complied with. Yet, the major part of the adjustment costs will fall on the private sector, as enterprises will have to make substantial investments to comply with new product requirements and business practices. In this study we used the method of extrapolation of average costs for CEE countries' harmonization with acquis to estimate the potential harmonization costs for the neighboring countries based on internationally comparative macroeconomic indicators like sectoral and total value added. This involved estimating the EU pre-accession support for the CEE countries by main areas as a percentage of the total or sectoral value added, determining the expected degree of limited harmonization in the ENP countries and estimating coefficients of limited harmonization", which was subsequently used for adjustment of the estimated cost of full harmonization.

In the process of furthering EU integration little attention was given to the role of income taxes. Multiple income tax systems exist across the Union and their differentiation negatively impacts the European labor market, investments and savings, inhibiting economic growth. Individual nations have little motivation to harmonize as they can engage in tax rate competition and income taxes are interwoven with social security systems that make any attempts at reform extremely complex and politically unpopular. Much of current harmonization is silent", paralegal, and occurs in response to market forces rather than following a formal plan and through intergovernmental cooperation.

This report is intended to provide an overview of income measures employed in the EU-SILC and to inform on procedures which can be employed to harmonize these data both for comparisons over time and between countries. Each subsection provides a short overview over a topic or method and contains example code for Stata and SPSS which can be used to implement the described procedures. Alongside this report syntax files as well as a data files for both SPSS and Stata are delivered which include the code provided here as well auxiliary country level data drawn from the Eurostat database.

For many years there have been political intentions to harmonize tax rates in Europe. As to capital income taxation, competition is often seen to be especially harmful. Facing a high degree of international capital mobility, every country is expected to reduce its tax rate in order to attract new capital or not to lose capital allocated in the country ("race to the bottom"). It is shown that the development of capital income tax rates in the European Union (EU) and in other industrialized countries as well as the development of corporate income tax revenues do not indicate that a race to the bottom has taken place. If tax competition should become as fierce as some observers seem to fear, the arguments in favor of tax competition instead of harmonization should be kept in mind. If tax rates are cut in a process of competition, government expenditures have to be reduced; this helps to avoid waste and inefficiencies in the public sector. In addition, tax competition might help to find better tax systems, and every country could learn from the experiences of other countries. In contrast, tax harmonization would probably lead to higher taxes in the EU.