Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (24) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (14)
- Part of Periodical (8)
- Working Paper (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (24)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (24) (remove)
Keywords
- Coronavirus (24) (remove)
Institute
- Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe (SAFE) (15)
- Rechtswissenschaft (12)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (10)
- Exzellenzcluster Die Herausbildung normativer Ordnungen (3)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (2)
- House of Finance (HoF) (2)
- Philosophie (2)
- Zentrum für Nordamerika-Forschung (ZENAF) (1)
Governments, economists and intellectuals have called for common European bonds or increased own EU funds to address the recession induced by Covid19. Unfortunately, the German government, joined by the other members of the “Frugal Four” (Austria, Finland, the Netherlands), has categorically rejected to look into any such measures and favours using the ESM. This reaction created a déjà vu experience for citizens and governments of the heavily affected southern Member States of the EU. The proposal to use the ESM raises fears of another wave of austerity amounting to yet another lost decade for economic, social, and ecological development in Europe.
A new virus, SARS-CoV-2, emerged in the Chinese city of Wuhan at the end of 2019. Infected persons developed an atypical form of pneumonia, later known as COVID-19. The pathogen created a pandemic, with fatalities throughout the world, and also led to the adoption of restrictive measures which were, until recently, unthinkable, as well as fostering new political conflicts. Even the path of the multilateral order in its current form is at stake. For a take on these issues under international law, the legal regime of the World Health Organization (WHO) and its response to the pandemic provides an insightful access. ...
This Policy Letter presents a proposal for designing a program of government assistance for firms hurt by the Coronavirus crisis in the European Union (EU). In our recent Policy Letter 81, we introduced a new, equity-type instrument, a cash-against-tax surcharge scheme, bundled across firms and countries in a European Pandemic Equity Fund (EPEF). The present Policy Letter 84 focuses on the principles and conditions relevant for the operationalization of a EPEF. Our proposal has several desirable features. It: a) offers better risk sharing opportunities, augmenting the resilience of businesses and EU economies; b) is need-based, thereby contributing to an effective use of resources; c) builds on conditions and credible controls, addressing adverse selection and moral hazard; d) is accessible to smaller and medium-sized firms, the backbone of Europe’s economy; e) applies Europe-wide uniform eligibility criteria, strengthening support among member states; f) is a scheme of limited duration, reducing (perceived) government interference in businesses; g) creates a template for a growth-oriented public policy, aligning public and private sector interests; and h) builds on the existing institutional infrastructure and requires minimal legislative adjustments.
Datenschutz versus Katastrophenschutz : Standortdaten als Mittel zur Bekämpfung der Corona-Pandemie
(2020)
Einige Länder setzen Standortdaten jetzt schon gezielt ein, um die weitere Ausbreitung von Covid-19 einzudämmen. Ein Gesetzentwurf von Bundesgesundheitsminister Jens Spahn, der weitreichende Befugnisse vorsah, um mithilfe von Standortdaten Kontaktpersonen von Infizierten über deren Handys zu orten, stieß auf teilweise heftige Kritik. Der Gesetzentwurf wurde daraufhin zurückgezogen, ohne dass nähere Einzelheiten an die Öffentlichkeit gelangt sind. Ein genauer Blick zeigt jedoch, dass eine Verarbeitung von Standortgesundheitsdaten nicht nur tatsächlich nützlich sein kann, sondern auch rechtlich möglich ist.