Search results

In the study, the EU's digital market in light of the new regulation issued by the European Commission: the Digital Market Act has been examined. It will allow regulation of a significant part of the EU digital market activities of giant tech companies to the extent that they will be much more complex and restrictive in comparison to the creation of the traditional internal market in the early 1990s. In view of recent changes occurring in the digital market, including the increased expansion of the biggest companies and problems related to competition, the aim of this study is to capture the change in approach of the EU competition policy to entities, so-called gatekeepers, who offer core online platform services as compared to the existing solutions functioning in the traditional European Single Market.

Preface -- Contents -- Part I: State of Play of Industry in the European Union -- Review of the Literature on the Theory of Industrial Policy -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Definition of Industrial Policy -- 2.1 Scope of Industrial Policy -- 2.2 Aims of Industrial Policy -- 2.3 Sectoral Industrial Policy -- 2.4 Horizontal Industrial Policy -- 2.5 Other Classifications of Industrial Policy -- 3 Arguments in Favour of Industrial Policy -- 4 Arguments Against Industrial Policy -- 5 Conclusions -- References -- The Industrial Sector in the European Union -- 1 Introduction

The main objective of this book has been to carry out research into the definition of industrial policy and its goals; to evaluate previously-introduced policies and instruments; and to identify the future challenges for and features of a modern EU industrial policy. A modern industrial policy is seen as a non-traditional policy towards the industrial sector, based not necessarily on only the elimination of market failures (within the sectoral and/or horizontal approaches), but rather on expanding the scope of industrial economic activities within the framework of both the pre- and post-fabrication stages. The book targets three market segments: academics; policy and decision-makers at the EU, national and regional level, as well as business practitioners. It includes a wide-ranging analysis of different spheres of industrial policies conducted within the European Union, making it of interest to an international audience. Each chapter also offers detailed and valuable comments, as well as conclusions that can be generally applied, ensuring the book's universality. The book presents the results of a research project conducted in the Collegium of World Economy at the Warsaw School of Economics.

Theoretical aspects of regional intervention / Adam A. Ambroziak -- Alignment of the cohesion policy in Poland to objectives and principles of the EU economic strategies (the Lisbon and Europe 2020 strategies) / Elzbieta Kawecka-Wyrzykowska -- Instruments of regional innovation policy supporting improvements in the competitive position of Polish enterprises in 2007-2013 / Marzenna Anna Weresa -- Effectiveness of support instruments for Polish entrepreneurs within the EU human capital development policy in the years 2007-2013 / Michael Schwabe -- Aid instruments for entrepreneurs in regions in Poland under the EU environmental policy in the years 2007-2013 / Grazyna Wojtkowska-Lodej -- Regional dimension of state aid to entrepreneurs after Poland's accession to the European Union / Adam A. Ambroziak

The main objective of the book is to identify and evaluate the major changes in the Cohesion Policy of the European Union and their effects on Polish regions for the period of 2014-2020. The reader will learn how these changes result from the successful agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework and implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy. Based on these aspects, the authors describe the main change in the Cohesion Policy of the EU, which is the renewed focus on competitiveness and skills to compete within the EU internal and the global market. The territorial approach taken by the EU with respect to entrepreneurial competitiveness is directly linked to the location attractiveness of regions.The authors argue that the new paradigm of the EU's Cohesion Policy will strengthen the focus on location attractiveness. To illustrate this case, they analyze Poland as one of the most appropriate and relevant Member States to evaluate the new rules underlying EU policies for 2014-2020, as Poland is the largest net-beneficiary of the EU budget

The European single market was launched on 1 st January 1993. Presumably, it is at that time that three fundamental barriers (physical control at the border, various technical requirements, and differing systems of indirect taxation) were formally removed to ensure four treaty-based freedoms: free movement of goods, freedom to provide services, free movement of people and free movement of capital. The EU single market is characteristic in nature due to the scope of legislation governing businesses and consumers, which is largely subject not to unification, rather only harmonisation. Regrettably, this has resulted in EU legislation being (deliberately at times) not always correctly implemented into the national legal system. This leads to market fragmentation and creates barriers, rather than eliminating them. This study aims to identify the relationship between full and correct implementation of EU legislation into the Member States' legal systems versus progress in European single market integration. Therefore, the evolution of indicators defining how much EU single market legislation in the Member States has been implemented was examined. At the same time, changes in transposition deficit (from 1997 to 2021) and conformity deficit (from 2004 to 2021) for particular Member States were critically analysed. Further, it was analysed how much the single market was integrated from the perspective of goods being the main components of the single European market. To this end, intra-EU trade was analysed as broken down into exports and imports of goods, versus the global trade of individual Member States (including trade with non-EU partners). The outcome of the study shows that both transposition and conformity deficit levels are quite high. In turn, intra-EU trade in goods does not largely correspond to the extent of implementation of EU legislation, which may be caused by growing interest in non-EU partners without compromising EU presence.

State aid is one of the financial instruments available to EU member states for intervention in domestic markets. On the one hand its use is prohibited by Article 107(1) TFEU, but on the other hand there are many exemptions, including regional and horizontal state aid. Given the centralised system for State aid in the EU, one could expect that the volume and structure in terms of forms and purposes of public aid granted should be similar from one member state to the next. Considering the diversity among what are now 27 member states, both from the perspective of experience in managing the economy and the directions of its development, the objective of this article is to capture and evaluate the similarities and differences in the approach taken to State aid as an instrument of intervention in two relatively different countries – Poland and Finland. To this end the comparative analysis will not only cover Poland and Finland themselves but also their respective groups of countries – the Visegrád Group and Scandinavian members of the EU. The above analysis permits the conclusion that the structure of public aid relative to the main purposes of granting differs significantly between Poland and Finland, in favour of Finland, from the perspective of the achievement of the EU objectives associated with the successive economic strategies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been an extraordinary event for the EU Member States and a period wherein EU legislation and the efficiency of EU institutions have been put to the test. The crisis triggered by the decisions made by governments in Europe (which were motivated by their wishes to protect the health and lives of their peoples and to satisfy the rapid
demand for drugs, personal protective equipment, and medical devices) disrupted market forces. Although most of these measures were based on both domestic and EU legislation, they seriously hindered the smooth functioning of the EU Single Market, including the free movement of goods. This paper aims to find out whether EU legislation succeeded in coping with the challenges triggered by COVID-19 in the field of international trade and whether measures taken by the European Commission with a view to complying with the rules of the EU Single Market adequately took care of the needs stemming from the COVID-19 outbreak and whether it properly tackled protectionist instruments adopted by the Member States. We have focused on international trade and the free movement of goods within the EU as they both constitute the cornerstone of EU economic integration. We found that although EU legislation was not tailored specifi cally for the times of a COVID-19 pandemic, in the area of international trade (including intra-EU trade), as well as in the field of placing goods on the market, it provided extraordinary solutions. Apparently, the explanations and guidelines provided by the Commission have limited the scope of individual protectionist and interventionist actions of the Member States .