The European Union Solidarity Fund: an assessment of its recent reforms

被引:0
|
作者
Stefan Hochrainer-Stigler
Joanne Linnerooth-Bayer
Anna Lorant
机构
[1] IIASA - International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis,
关键词
European Union Solidarity Fund; Climate adaptation; Disaster financing; Disaster risk reduction; Solidarity; Robustness; Risk pools; Stress testing;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
After extensive flooding in 2002, the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) was created as an ex post loss-financing vehicle for EU member states and candidate countries in the case of disasters that exceed the government’s resources to cope. The EUSF is viewed as a valuable instrument for pooling risk among countries in Europe and potentially as a model for financing loss and damage from climate change in vulnerable countries worldwide. This paper assesses its future prospects taking account of reforms adopted in 2014. Our analysis is based on three recognized aims of the Solidarity Fund: its promotion of solidarity with those countries having the least capacity to cope with major disasters; its contribution to proactive disaster risk reduction and management (climate adaptation); and its robustness with regard to its risk of depletion (stress testing). Using a simulation approach for future disasters, we conclude that the reformed EUSF’s risk of depletion, although it is reasonably robust to more frequent disasters, could be reduced by increasing member state contributions and/or engaging in risk transfer. The European Commission has taken important steps in linking the fund to proactive risk reduction; yet, by changing its budgeting practices, the commission could be more proactive in encouraging risk management in member states. In its current form, the EUSF does not embed needs-based solidarity. Lower-income “new” member states have received disproportionately less compensation in terms of eligible losses, although on average, they have received more disaster aid than what they contribute to the fund. Solidarity could be enhanced by changing the rules for disbursing aid. After briefly describing alternative risk-pooling models in the Caribbean, Africa, and Europe, we suggest how design features of the EUSF as compared to other regional risk pools can inform discussions on the Warsaw International Loss and Damage Mechanism.
引用
收藏
页码:547 / 563
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Understanding solidarity in the European Union: an analytical framework
    Saracino, Daniele
    THEORY AND SOCIETY, 2024, 53 (05) : 1093 - 1118
  • [32] The Management of the European Union's Development Fund
    Sabau-Popa, Diana Claudia
    BUSINESS TRANSFORMATION THROUGH INNOVATION AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT: AN ACADEMIC PERSPECTIVE, VOLS 3 AND 4, 2010, : 2238 - 2246
  • [33] Structural Reforms and Growth Potential in the European Union
    Halmai, Peter
    PUBLIC FINANCE QUARTERLY-HUNGARY, 2015, 60 (04): : 510 - 525
  • [34] TURKEY'S FUTURE REFORMS AND THE EUROPEAN UNION
    Alessandri, Emiliano
    TURKISH POLICY QUARTERLY, 2011, 10 (01): : 69 - 78
  • [35] Liberalization reforms on the energy sector of the European Union
    Palazuelos Manso, Enrique
    Vara Miranda, Mario Jesus
    REVISTA DE ECONOMIA MUNDIAL, 2008, (18): : 423 - 436
  • [36] DYNAMIC SCORING OF TAX REFORMS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
    Barrios, Salvador
    Dolls, Mathias
    Maftei, Anamaria
    Peichl, Andreas
    Riscado, Sara
    Varga, Janos
    Wittneben, Christian
    JOURNAL OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT, 2019, 38 (01) : 239 - +
  • [37] The national boundaries of solidarity: a survey experiment on solidarity with unemployed people in the European Union
    Kuhn, Theresa
    Kamm, Aaron
    EUROPEAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2019, 11 (02) : 179 - 195
  • [38] The concept of solidarity in cohesion policies of the European Union and Hungary
    Czirfusz, Marton
    ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING C-POLITICS AND SPACE, 2021, 39 (05) : 919 - 937
  • [39] The European Union Solidarity FundIts legitimacy, viability and efficiency
    Stefan Hochrainer
    Joanne Linnerooth-Bayer
    Reinhard Mechler
    Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2010, 15 : 797 - 810