Issue 0 | LXX Magazine | July 2012

Dear all,

the Issue 0 is a special edition of the LXX Magazine, the official newspaper of the 70th International session in Tallinn.

While it may not convey to the fullest the excitement for the session and everything that awaits, we hope it sheds new light on the topics and deepens your understanding of the issues involved. From the insightful Chinese-made fish and chips, over the ever-complicated relations between the EU and Russia, all the way to the everyday problem of balancing personal and professional life, the Issue 0 is a benevolent attempt to bring you closer to comprehending the complexity of perspectives you are about to embark on tackling. Much luck in your preparation and see you all very soon!

Yours,The Media Team

2

3 Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 2 (LIBE 2) Other side of Censorship

5 Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 1 (LIBE 1) Parking Space, Outer Space and Closet Space

7 Committee on International Trade (INTA) Fish & Chips: Made in China

9 Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO) Reinventing European Union both for the sake of today and tomorrow

11 Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 3 (LIBE 3) When Europe becomes the new Dreamland

13 Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) The (un)likely triangle

15 Committee on Development (DEVE) Water everywhere... and not a drop to drink?

17 Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 2 (ENVI 2) Thirsty for some action

19 Committee on Regional Development (REGI) Ecotopia

21 Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 1 (ENVI 1) Time to choose your own natural disaster

23 Committee on Industry, Research and Energy 2 (ITRE 2) Playing God: Science and its Future

25 Committee on Industry, Research and Energy 1 (ITRE 1) Everything comes down to... more investment?

27 Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) Banking Union: breakthrough or breakdown

29 Committee on Employment and Social Affairs 1 (EMPL 1) No princes here, only paupers

31 Committee on Employment and Social Affairs 2 (EMPL 2) Europe is turning grey

33 A teaser, a spoiler; Tallinn will see a new speech at the General Assembly

Content

Internet policy – the debate on how to prevent cyber

crime while ensuring free-dom on the internet – has quickly become one the most controversial topics in poli-tics. Considering the recent public outcry over attempts to pass legislature such as the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), how should we approach a topic to which, cynically put, every solution seems to create more problems than it solves? Here are four things to keep in mind.keep in mind.

Firstly, when discussing cyber crime most people talk about free file sharing, or piracy. Pi-racy is the act of sharing and downloading copyrighted material without the permis-sion of the copyright holder. Some people equate this to stealing, and many industries have tried to lobby govern-ments to introduce anti-pi-racy laws. Although such laws have been introduced in European countries such as France and Sweden their effi-ciency has to be questioned. Sweden’s soft Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) has done little to curb file sharing. At the same time revenue in the music industry has decreased by 3,9% in France since the introduction of the Haute Autorité Pour la Diffusion des Œuvres et la Protection des Droits sur Internet (HADOPI), which allows the govern-

ment to turn off all internet access if you are caught ille-gally downloading files three times.

Secondly, if we return to Swe-den, and focus on the music industry, there has been a clear decline to music piracy. However, this is not due to the legislature but rather the rise of the music platform Spo-tify. Spotify offers 10 hours of free music with commer-cials each month, and if you pay a fee you get unlimited monthly music access which you can also download to your computer or phone. But what does this teach us? That it is possible to make a profit off music in today’s digital age. Maybe there is not a problem with the legislature, but rather a problem of the market clinging tightly to old and inefficient methods.

the other Side of CensorshipBy Felix Makarowski (SE)

3Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 2 (LIBE 2)

Thirdly, there is certain para-noia about how states can use internet laws to censor and monitor its citizens. What are such concerns based on and how seriously should we take them? According to the Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2011 Democracy Index, only 16 of Europe’s roughly 50 states rank as full democra-cies. That is roughly 30%. Six states are ranked as either hybrid or authoritarian re-gimes, Turkey, Ukraine and Russia among them. The rest of Europe is considered to consist of flawed democra-cies. Although most Euro-pean countries scored high on civil liberties, the rise of the extreme right in Europe and the declining democracy in Hungary and Romania are a cause of serious concern. In light of this assessment – how can we move on as one united Europe?

Fourthly, although this ar-ticle has so far focused on the critical aspects of new internet legislature, there is a legitimate concern about in-ternet fraud. Nigerian princes and bankers from places you have never heard of waiting to give you your non-exist-ing aunt’s inheritance need to be dealt with, so do web sites and people selling coun-terfeited goods. In order to achieve this, we need to look at our existing laws and ask ourselves: Do we feel safe that an independent court would uphold our case if we were defrauded today? If yes, then fine. If not, action needs to be taken to protect all Eu-ropean citizens from scams on the internet.

To conclude, before begin-ning discussions on the topic, I invite you to see what really needs to be done, and

why. Also consider who needs to change and how we should implement these changes. Finally, I ask you to consider this: in a free society, things have a way of working them-selves out. •

4

‘Families: A social unit where the father is con-

cerned with parking space, the children with outer space and the mother with closet space.’The 1950’s comedian Evan Esar’s definition of the word family. While the defini-tion which can be found in “Esar’s Comic Dictionary” is by no means official, it does remind one of how the fam-ily unit has evolved over the past few decades.

Families were once almost exclusively comprised of a mother, a father and a couple of kids. Nowadays this fam-ily norm no longer exists; there is no “average family”. Families could consist of sin-gle mothers or fathers, two mothers, two fathers, only siblings, foster parents, aunts or uncles or friends as guard-ians. Does a family even re-quire the presence of a child in order to be defined as a family? Now while it may not be advisable to try and define “family”, it is well worth be-ing aware that each family is unique, that it finds itself in its own specific situation and therefore may have different needs to other families in the country or continent.

What needs might a family have and who should pro-vide them?Society has also changed over the years. In the past we

Parking Space, outer Space and Closet Space

By Sandra Harney (IE)

5Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 1 (LIBE 1)

moved around less, mean-ing extended families lived nearby and reliable granny or granddad could mind the kids when mommy and daddy needed a break, give advice when new parents were unsure and maybe even offer financial support in rough times when that electricity bill seemed impos-sible to pay off. What about the neighbours that replaced them? They seem to be little relief as many of us no longer really knows our neighbours. Modern lifestyles and the de-sire for both career and fam-ily have us commuting long distances and have resulted in a detachment from what is local and a familiarity of that which is far away.

So, as much as progress and modernisation has made our lives much easier, the way in which it has evolved

has stripped families of their natural support mechanisms that supply many of the fam-ily services that local govern-ments now find themselves having to supply. What can the european Union do to help local gov-ernments to step up their game in ensuring families can live happy balanced lives?Naturally different countries will have varying approaches to how much taxpayer or welfare money should be spent on family related ser-vices. What kind of policy should the EU have when on one hand you have states like Finland where high taxes provide for universal day-care, big family benefits and generous parental leave and on the other hand states like Latvia where parents have to juggle multiple jobs just to stay afloat?

Society has changed, family needs have changed. Most countries in Europe offer family services but not at the same level, what can the EU do to ensure equal living standards for all citizens in Europe? We have come a long way from Esan’s Comic Dic-tionary’s definition of family, the values have stayed the same but in the name of progress we now strive to en-sure that no woman’s, man’s, a citizen’s professional ambi-tions are held back by their wish for a family life. As the playwright George Bernard Shaw once said: ‘Perhaps the greatest social service that can be rendered by anybody to this country and to man-kind is to bring up a family’. •

6

Fish and chips, that quintes-sential dish of English cui-

sine, is traditionally prepared using codfish. Now that the once-plentiful stocks of cod around Britain and in the Bal-tic Sea are depleted, many chippies are switching to other white fish instead. A common but inferior substitute lack-ing the exquisite flaky texture of cod, pangasius, is often farmed cheaply in small, mud-dy Vietnamese ponds. They are exported frozen via China, where the fish are deboned and packaged as fillets. Lower labour costs in Vietnam and China allow pangasius to beat out the tastier traditional Nor-wegian cod, endangering the quality of one of England’s finest traditions.

The hidden dangers threaten-ing fish and chips reflect some of the costs of international trade. By importing pangas-ius rather than cod, fish and chip shops can sometimes avoid raising their prices, which benefits consumers. However, not only do Viet-namese pangasius put Eng-lish culinary culture at risk, they divert revenue from the certifiably sustainable and historic fisheries of Norway and Iceland to fish farms in Southeast Asia where labour is exploited and mismanage-ment damages local habitats, compromises water supplies and sometimes leads to dis-ease-causing bacteria devel-oping antibiotic resistance.

Meanwhile, the EU’s Com-mon Agricultural Policy maintains a tariff and sub-sidy regime that shuts out imports while drastically

reducing export prices. This raises prices and taxes for European consumers and distorts developing coun-tries’ agricultural markets. Every year, cheap European sugar dumped in Mozam-bique costs the country more than the total of its national budget for agriculture and rural development. Frozen chicken thighs and wings ex-ported to Senegal and Ghana are 50 per cent cheaper than fresh chicken from domestic farmers. Under-priced sur-plus powdered milk from the EU forces farmers in Mali, In-dia and Jamaica to let fresh milk run into underserviced gutters. Yet without the CAP, Europe’s pastoral traditions, the fertile fields and the low-ing, lumbering cattle that preserve the green beauty and age-old lifestyles of rural regions, could all disappear. The CAP allows Europe to

Fish & Chips: Made in ChinaBy Saki Shinoda (CH)

7Committee on International Trade (INTA)

carry out development in its own rural regions, preserve tradition and keep European agriculture efficient.

In many developing coun-tries, imported products from European firms with experi-ence and global economies of scale put great pressure on domestic firms in fledgling in-dustries. While this pressure can push domestic firms to become more efficient, it can also put them out of business. Even in newly industrialised economies, European firms risk crippling technological or service-oriented domestic industries, or prevent home-grown innovation. European countries investing or trading in developing countries may also be accused of continuing colonialism, or be criticized for their exclusive trade deals with former colonies.

For a long time, European countries have had the up-per hand in their foreign rela-tions with today’s developing countries. Compared to the easy and brutal exploitation of resources made possible by colonialism, trade inter-dependency is undoubtedly riskier. Being dependent on huge quantities of imported crude oil, coal and gas from Russia or rare metals from Congo renders Europe politi-cally and economically vul-nerable. Nations must meet their own needs and protect their own interests. Europe does that and more: it of-ten looks out for the rights and interests of populations beyond their borders. Still, some of its actions reflect a waning power clinging des-perately to the dispropor-tionate benefits of an out-dated system.

Trade and globalisation threaten to change every-thing: life, language, culture, people, the status quo, even what fish we get with our chips. Inevitably, tradition may have to be sacrificed. Compromises will turn out to be necessary. Difficult, di-visive questions will have to be answered. The shape of tomorrow remains unclear as of yet; tomorrow could bring cod, pangasius or even a new national dish for Eng-land. Tomorrow is unclear, but it is Europe’s chance to define it today. •

8

While Euroscepticism has been growing for years,

the current economic, finan-cial and debt crises seem to be the true catalysers for a profound change in the way the European Union (EU) works. Indeed, now is the time to redesign the institutional framework of the EU, not only to resolve the acute problems of the Eurozone, but also issues that have been present for years. Problems, such as the demographic deficit or the rather delicate challenge of balancing competences be-tween Brussels and national capitals, must be addressed, whilst drawing up new struc-tures.

Reinventing the european Union:both for the sake of today and tomorrow

By Arnolds Eizenšmits (LV)

9Committee on Constitutional Affairs (AFCO)

Moreover, in order to make the new framework sustain-able, it must also take into consideration megatrends which will shape Europe in years to come.

At the height of the current crises, when crucial decisions regarding Europe are taken by a handful of people that have not even been directly elected, increasingly many are losing faith in European institutions. Consequently, anti-EU parties are gaining ground across Europe. This has also been confirmed by, for instance, the persistently decreasing voter turnout at elections of the European Parliament. While no simple and rapid solution exists, in addition to increasing the number and role of bodies chosen by all citizens, other op-tions, such as informing Europe-ans better, could be discussed.

In the long-term, various megatrends will change our continent profoundly and the new model must be able to adapt to those develop-ments. For example, tak-ing into consideration the increasingly important role women will play in society, the EU should contemplate the introduction of ‘pink quo-tas’ which would foster the participation of women in its institutions. Another mega-trend is the increasing speed of development in the field of technology, which will accel-erate even more in the future. That raises several questions, for instance, about how digi-talised the EU should be-come. Furthermore, bearing in mind climate change, the new framework needs to take into account environ-mental aspects, too.Inevitably, the Committee will need to agree upon the

general direction of the EU – should the new framework pave way for more Europe-an integration, or quite the contrary? Is it time for the EU to take up new compe-tences, such as determining a common policy regarding education? Which way would individual Member States be stronger to face future chal-lenges? And how can it be en-sured that European citizens will consider this new order legitimate?

We eagerly wait to find out what would the young Eu-ropean minds of this Com-mittee do, if they could start from a scratch. •

10

The search for wealth, freedom and the improve-

ment of living conditions have always moved masses and entire populations from country to country, from a continent to another one. A constant desire for a bet-ter life, where human rights are respected and where op-pression is just a shadow of a former existence, remains one of the main causes of migratory flows. During the centuries, the name of the dreamland has changed sev-eral times. Once European masses moved to America for a better future, now it is the European Union’s turn to represent the hope of the op-pressed.

Every year thousands of peo-ple risk their lives and give all they have got to human traf-fickers with the promise of a safe passage through the Eu-ropean borders. While a con-spicuous number of immi-grants dramatically die while trying to reach our shores, the ones who manage to arrive in their dreamland have to set-tle in new countries, embrace new laws and obtain a resi-dence permit. However the migratory flux towards the EU does not have the same impact on all Member States. Southern Europe is obviously the core of this phenomenon, as it offers the easiest way to reach the continent and move north to settle in other regions. Another widespread conthem back sequence is the involvement of immi-grants in illegal traffics, wors-ening the living condition of the hosting country.

When europe becomes the new Dreamland

By Elisa Martinelli (IT)

11Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 3 (LIBE 3)

This led some states to es-tablish a prevention policy aiming at reducing the mi-gration towards their own soil, a decision that seemed to go against the principles of united borders and mutual help.

A recent example can be found in the attitude France adopted after the events of the Arab Spring. An increased number of refugees fled from their own countries to start a new life in Europe, far from war and its horrors, landing on the Italian shores. They then moved towards the French border trying to join some of their relatives, but the French government sent them back to Italy as soon as they got caught. This event triggered a clash between the two countries: on the one hand France tried to protect its own borders, on the other

hand Italy considered this policy hostile and opposed to the principle of cooperation among the Member States. It is therefore fundamental to find a solution that can protect the borders of every state.

Should all the countries join forces and find a reason-able compromise to solve this problem or should they act independently? The EU has always acted as a single body, basing all its strength in its unity. In a moment where a severe economic crisis is striking every single country and outside their borders people struggle for their living, is cooperation the only way to deal with this issue? Europe can help these people finding a better future, bearing in mind the importance of protecting not only its borders but also its

interests. Finding a balanced policy is definitely the key to success, but the question on how the EU should reach this goal remains open. •

12

If we realise that the main raison d’être of NATO was

to counterbalance the pow-er of Russia (or the USSR), it seems to be a fairly ex-traordinary idea that NATO and Russia now cooperate. Nevertheless, the situation today is very different from the one 50 years ago, and the threats faced by today’s nations differ substantially from the ones of the Cold War. As we have realised, the current status quo can no longer be held and the EU needs to come up with a clear strategy on how to deal with its vast eastern neighbour.

For many people in Eastern Europe, it is still difficult to accept that Russia should be taken as an equal partner in military negotiations. They still remember the Red Army invasion into Hungary in 1956 or the Warsaw Pact oc-cupation of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Even in Russia, some people still believe that the fall of the USSR is the ‘’great-est geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century’’, and that Russia needs to keep its sov-ereignty rather than share it with the US or indeed the EU. The recent protests against Russian membership in the WTO have shown that there is still some level of distrust towards the West among Russia’s citizens.

On the other hand, the facts are undeniable – Russia has been one of the most impor-tant business agents east of

the (un)likely triangleBy Jan Nedvídek (CZ)

13Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET)

Germany, and without Rus-sian resources, more than 100 million Europeans would have no jobs, no heating and would not be able to drive their cars. Due (or thanks to) the current economical inter-dependence of Russia, the EU and the US, isolationism is clearly not an option. The EU’s hopes to establish an alternative source for our energy consumption have sadly enough failed. The Na-bucco project is extremely unlikely to materialise due to Turkey’s demands. Keeping the recent Arab Spring and the huge political instabil-ity of that region in mind, it would not be very smart of us to rely solely on oil from the Middle East. Re-newable sources of energy being not efficient and the nuclear energy not popular

enough, the fact that Russia will carry on being our main source of energy is self-evi-dent.

At the same time, we can ob-serve a shift in the priorities of American foreign policy. Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans are no lon-ger the US’ main interest. We might therefore ask whether the US Secretary of State is not willing to make some concessions in terms of the EU-Russia relations in order to secure Russia’s support in the Asia-Pacific region.

All these facts, together with Western criticism of the un-satisfactory situation regard-ing human rights in Russia create a difficult environment for a real and honest military partnership. Nonetheless, scholars have described poli-tics as the “art of the impossi-

ble”, and therefore we ought to at least try.

Perhaps the traditional mili-tary cooperation is no longer desirable. Perhaps we need to focus more on terrorism, cybernetic safety and hu-manitarian catastrophes. I can merely conclude that we must not underestimate the importance of the EU-NATO-Russia relations, especially after the crisis in Syria, where these three entities seem to disagree. It is undeniably a very complex issue, but the possible outcome- a safe and energetically secured Europe is. •

14

It has to seem a bit ironic that while 70 per cent of our “blue

planet” is covered by water, only 0.007 per cent of that water is readily accessible for human use. Still, as small as 0.007 per cent sounds, that water would be sufficient to comfortably cover the global industrial and domestic de-mand of 7 billion people living on this planet. That is to say, it could be sufficient, if geog-raphy and politics would not distribute the access to it so unequally.

For example, in the Jordan Rift Valley, where the epony-mous Jordan River provides water for Israel, Syria, Jor-dan and Lebanon, the river’s flow has decreased by 90 per cent due to human utilisa-tion. Israel’s daily water us-age amounts to 350 litres per capita, compared to 60 litres per Jordanian and 30 litres per Palestinian, while a mu-tual limit of 200 litres daily per capita could grant all par-ties a sufficient supply. For-tunately, in the last decade, the effort to increase access to drinking water has made a dent in the water scarcity of the Middle East and Africa. According to EuropeAid, the UN Millennium Development Goal to decrease the propor-tion of people without sus-tainable access to safe drink-ing water by half was reached in 2010. Projects supported by the European Commission

alone contributed to that goal by improving water ac-cess for 32 million people be-tween 2004 and 2009. Yet Europe has the possibility to make a still greater impact on both the geographical and political factor of water scar-city and conflicts that arise from it. On the one hand, Europe can contribute to ensuring that existing water supplies are utilised fairly and efficiently. On an international level, that means stressing the im-portance of “hydro-diploma-cy” between neighbouring states in arid regions, as well as between the aforemen-tioned states and the Euro-pean countries themselves.In developing countries, official institutions for (esp. transna-tional) water management often lack capacities and

Water everywhere... and not a drop to drink?

By Randolf Carr (DE)

15Committee on Development (DEVE)

resources. Effective wa-ter management in these countries also includes fair cross-sectorial coordina tion between different water con-sumers, such as the general population, public services, and (oftentimes European) industries or corporations. “Public ownership” – partici-pation of actors at all levels – is essential for water man-agement policies to func-tion. Therefore individuals, corporations and govern-ments must be aware of their relative responsibility for the sound management of scarce resources. On the other hand, equalising water distribution is not doing enough. Population growth, urbanisation, and economic development are increas-ingly taxing the limited wa-ter resources in developing countries. Therefore, a major

task is also to sustainably in-crease the supplies in regions where water is scarce. Europe as a leading force in the de-velopment of environmental technology can play a great role in meeting this practi-cal challenge. For example, the technique of desalinating seawater has proven effective in Australia and the Arabian Peninsula. Constructing de-salination plants with Euro-pean help could also increase freshwater supplies for Afri-can countries, many of which suffer from very limited water access despite long coastlines. Next to increasing the amount of available freshwater, recy-cling it is equally important. It may not be glamorous, but European aid to improve sani-tation infrastructure and agri-cultural techniques to prevent water contamination could have a crucial impact. The World Health Organisation

estimates that 1€ invested in drinking water and sanita-tion can generate returns of up to 34€ that save lives and increase prosperity. In Europe water is taken for granted and used abundantly, often even care-lessly, while people in other regions of the world suffer. If this abundance appar-ently cannot be sacrificed and shared with these less fortunate regions, it is up to Europe to at least foster their regional development and take the edge off their water distress. Either Europe takes action to alleviate water scar-city now, or it will have to deal with the dire consequences of water conflicts and migration already tomorrow. •

16

At primary school one learns how vital water is

for life on our planet. How-ever, the European Com-mission (EC) seems to have only recently started paying attention to this little fact. Not only the European struc-tures, but also important international actors, such as the United Nations (UN), have promptly brought wa-ter into the spotlight.

The increasing worldwide demand for safe water for human and animal con-sumption, especially in the emerging economies, along with the growing fears of potential conflicts caused by water insufficiency, have mobilised policymakers, economists, environmental-ists, consumers and civil so-ciety. Worrying about water seems to be the new trend in international politics.

Despite the attention, what we know for sure is that we know very little. The data offered by the EC are not re-cent and does not cover all aspects of this problem. One of the most important steps so far, has been the launch of the “Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe” by the EC in 2011. Nonetheless, the wa-ter issue is not optimally ad-dressed in this publication.

thirsty for some actionBy Aida Grishaj (AL)

17Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 2 (ENVI 2)

The upcoming “Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Waters” seems to be the most prom-ising action for improving the EU water policy. The Blue-print will go along with the EU 2020 Strategy and is ex-pected to be implemented by 2020. It will include analysis on the current waters in the EU, as well as setting future targets concerning water ef-ficiency, water management, governance in water policy, global dimension of water resource management. Mov-ing the water issue from a national to an EU level is a request gathering more and more followers. The idea of the EU standardising practis-es regarding water manage-ment, controlling the quality and prices of this resource, seems to be the most accept-able one. There are several reasons for this. First of all, the prices across Europe dif-

fer a lot from one region to another. Secondly, the new incentive of privatising water resources has led to objec-tions from different stake-holders. They claim that a common good such as water is better for specific groups or enterprises. Improving tech-nology is another important step to be considered since it is estimated to significantly reduce water leakage.

The consumer behaviours in Europe are also a matter of concern. European citizens often lack accurate and up-to-date information on this issue. Taking water, its qual-ity and supply for granted, and therefore not doing enough in using it wisely, is an attitude that must be changed. Even though the quality of tap water is very good in many countries, for example Germany, citizens

continue to buy bottled mineral water. Not knowing that mineral water is not any healthier than fresh water that they have access to at their homes, leads to a nega-tive ecobalance due to the plastic waste caused by their consumption habits.

By making water a central topic in the political discus-sion, the EU is trying to put itself in a globally leading position in offering the issue long-term and sustainable solutions. The commitment to meet the Millennia Goals set by the UN, as well incen-tives such as the “Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Waters” seem promising, but in order to set standards , which are supposed to be a reference point for the whole world, the EU needs more than words and documents. •

18

In a metropolis double the size of another in area

or population, average per capita electric cable length and number of gas stations falls by approximately 15%, while income, patents, sav-ings and other indicators of wealth rise by 15%. In developed countries, many cities, including Madrid, Seoul, Brussels and New York, have lower per capita greenhouse gas emissions than the national average due to high population den-sities and public transit sys-tems.

Unfortunately, this efficiency boost is offset by urban sprawl. New York has much lower car-bon dioxide emissions than most other American cities be-cause the latter are character-ised by suburban sprawl. Many homes lie beyond walking dis-tance of workplacesand shops. This sprawl gobbles up clean air, farmland and en-ergy.

Though seen occurring all over the world, notably now in de-veloping countries, sprawl is not necessarily the organic way for a city to grow. It historically occurred, and still continues to occur, because people desire more living space—a preoc-cupation probably agricultural in origin—and because cars are affordable and available. Both these factors can and will change. In the face of pressing environmental concerns and growing global populations,

they must. Reformers must not be afraid to dream big. While Europe does not have the problems of rapid popula-tion growth and mass rural-to-urban migration as many developing countries do, it stands to benefit just as much, economically, socially and en-vironmentally, from innovative urban reform. This does not have to be in the form of de-signing and building eco-cities from scratch as China and Abu Dhabi are doing in Dongtan and Masdar City. Smaller plans that affect specific facets of life in specific cities can do as much good.

Visions for future cities are necessarily limited by inevi-table constraints. Many cities, including London, do not have a single central authority with the power to completely trans-form an entire metropolis with a unified plan for large-scale

ecotopiaBy Saki Shinoda (CH)

19Committee on Regional Development (REGI)

infrastructure, as in historical Seoul. Existing homes cannot simply be demolished. Cultural heritage must be protected. Geographical factors have to be accounted for. High-pol-luting heavy industries cannot just be wished away.

Nonetheless, technology and clever thinking can offer many solutions to the vast range of growing pains that a city might experience. Tokyo, with its limited space, high population and frequent earthquakes, has somewhat extreme require-ments that are effectively ful-filled by a strict building code that allows for seismically stable skyscrapers, prevents tall buildings from blocking sunlight to neighbouring build-ings, and maintains adequate space between buildings to increase quality of life. Urban farming techniques, especially high-density farming, while

still largely untested, could potentially reduce transporta-tion costs for food, act as local carbon sinks in urban centres, and allow for more rural land currently used agriculturally to be restored to natural con-ditions. Walking, cycling and public transit becomes more efficient and attractive in more compact, densely populated areas, and sprawling cities based on the car could become vertical cities built around el-evator backbones. The con-cept of the ‘aerotropolis’, a city built around air traffic just as 19th-century cities were built around railways, further in-vestment in high speed rail, or development of more efficient air travel, as with sub-orbital spaceflight, could increase connectivity between these compact urban hubs while preventing encroachment on valuable rural resources.

This vision is still only one of many possible forms that the city solution to growing popu-lations and environmental pressures could take. It is still vague and riddled with prob-lems, but the radical changes that the human population and the world environment are undergoing require both short-term measures, and long-term visionary strides that can truly transform cities into sustain-able solutions for the future. •

20

It cannot be disputed by anyone; nature, our own

world, is becoming more and more dangerous. From draughts to tsunamis, from earthquakes to tornados, our environment has always shown its great power. In an era of financial turmoil, our ability to tackle this kind of challenges is much more dif-ficult than the past years. The reflexes of European Union are being questioned more than any other time in the past; if EU Member States could not control their own finances, how can they deal with unpredicted and sudden natural disas-ters?

Τhis situation is not only lim-ited to great disasters. The impact of climate change is obvious in our everyday life. The last five spring periods in Greece have been record-ed as part of the top 20 of the warmest ever, while the last one (March-May 2012) was the warmest since 1987. One is also to expect warm winters, considering the fact that scientists claim that Earth’s average temperature is climbing. Nevertheless, this is not the case. Winter periods across Europe are harsher than ever, while many people lose their lives because of the low tempera-tures.

Therefore, it is of the vital importance for Europe to find the way to tackle this kind of crisis. To start with, the level of preparedness is definitely something that

we need to focus on. For in-stance, regions facing flood danger or those exposed to an increased earthquake risk need to take the respective measures. A higher level of preparedness can also help a country’s economy get back on track after a disaster. The need for quick and effec-tive response mechanisms is undoubted. However, the means of succeeding a goal like this is still under discus-sion. Who should take which measures, and what role should the EU play in this process?

And yet there is even more we need to focus on. The European Union is often accused of being very slow, when needed to react quickly. This point is referred to a number of different aspects; from

time to choose your own natural disaster

By Ilias-Marios Oikonomou (GR)

21Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety 1 (ENVI 1)

decision-making to crisis management. Slow crisis management for climate-related disasters could even create greater problems than the ones that came up from natural causes. Thus, how should Europe prepare for extreme weather conditions? How can all the agencies in charge provide the people with the best possible solu-tions? Is there any proper way for them to be coordinated? There are numerous points to be taken into account in order to provide high quality services in a crisis situation. Furthermore, some argue that the European Union needs a crisis management mechanism that focuses on the right level. Extreme weather conditions can be present either throughout Europe or limited to a small region. On the other hand, natural phenomena such as

great floods usually influence a big yet specific area. Ac-cordingly, all diversities be-tween different regions, as well as the common ground that can be found in greater areas should be taken into consideration. A variety of regional and larger reaction schemes could be created or more attention could be given on town planning in proportion to the demands on protection by extreme natural phenomena.

Last but not least, one has to think about the prevention of an even increased number of similar phenomena. The implementation of an envi-ronmental policy and the co-operation between Member States could bring progress, and is part of the Treaty of Lisbon; however, its imple-mentation is still in an early stage.

It is now up to us to come up with the solutions in order to protect Europeans for future natural disasters and extreme weather conditions. It is up to you to find the way for every-one to be and feel safer at those hard moments. •

22

Humans are “playing God” and many things seen in

science fiction films are far from fiction. Mankind is at a turning point because sci-ence and technology have combined in a way no one ever thought possible.

Dr. Craig Venter, who is lead-ing a special area in human genome analysis, has been working to create synthetic life forms for years. In his own words, his company Synthetic Genomics Inc. is very near to creating world’s first man-made living crea-ture. Many argue that this can lead to irrevocable prob-lems, both accidentally and consciously. No one has made any headway propos-ing some sort of control cri-teria either.

There is a gamble between maintaining biological bal-ance and taking a step too far and actually abusing sci-ence. Many are crying out the magic word “ethics” in order to stop the possible consequences. Despite all the hype around ethics, sci-ence and technology have improved the life of the “nor-mal person” immensely.

Playing God: Science and its Future

By Erdem Osman Topçu (TR)

23Committee on Industry, Research and Energy 2 (ITRE 2)

Stem cells are used to regen-erate and repair diseased or damaged tissue. Before using new drugs on people, researchers can also use stem cells to test the safety and quality of experimental drugs, therefore, putting PETA well at ease, too. From a social viewpoint, biometric passports offer a good ex-ample. Data security is the direct result of using biomet-ric passports, which reduce the risk of theft, forgery and embezzlement. Of course, the EUo take into consider-ation that people have differ-ent perceptions of what is right and what is wrong. There are still many people who oppose the x-ray machinesin airports despite welcoming biometrics passports. In order to bring some objectivity into research, some are suggesting scientific experiments be supervised by control mechanisms. They

would support the scientists by publishing feasibility stud-ies without interfering in the actual work. However, legisla-tions are different in many EU countries, no actual control mechanisms, criteria are con-sidered yet. And should the EU even limit and control scientific freedom?

Many feel such a step needs to be taken. Recent Euroba-rometer surveys show that Europeans want ethics to play an essential role in scientific re-search and demand harmony between the methods and goals of scientific research and moral and ethical principles. Those surveys also show Eu-ropeans’ strong attachment to social values and ethics. How-ever, a majority give priority to objectivity over moral and ethical issues as far as science and technology decision-mak-ing process is concerned. The

positive role scientists play in society is widely recognised, but the way scientists handle information towards the public is criticised. With this societal interest in scientific develop-ments, a balance between eth-ics and science can be found by taking into consideration the opinions of people and actual-ising them in control mecha-nisms that the EU is trying to set up.

Who knows what the future brings to scientists like Dr. Craig Venter and if the ethical red line will stay as strong as it has thus far. The doctor, how-ever, is not so easily swayed. “Science in my view is, and should be, fun,” Dr. Craig Ven-ter says. “A lot of people make it tedious. I don’t understand why. ... I’m constantly accused of trying to have the best of all worlds, and I. •

24

With a current electric grid built more than half a

century ago, some argue the continent’s ageing grid infra-structure is “creakingly inef-ficient, hopelessly wasteful and liable to breakdown”. EU has already underlined the urgency to upgrade Europe’s networks toward a European “smart super-grid”, interconnecting them at the continental level. Ac-cording to the International Energy Agency (IAE), Europe requires investments of €1.5 trillion from 2007 to 2030 for the renewal of the electrical grid. Meanwhile, a report from Pike Research fore-casts that during the period from 2010 to 2020, cumula-tive European investment in smart grid technologies will reach a mere $80.0 billion.

Under the Digital Agenda, EU’s target by 2020 is to get coverage for every European to have fast broadband of over 30 megabits per second; and to get 50% of house-holds subscribing to ultra-fast speeds of over 100 mega-bits per second. The Digital Agenda Scoreboard confirms that research investments are “falling further behind our competitors”; with a drop in commercial research invest-ment, the EU Information and Communications Technology (ICT) has less than half the R&D intensity of the US ICT sector.

With the 2011 White Paper “Roadmap to a Single Euro-pean Transport Area” the Eu-ropean Commission adopted a roadmap of 40 concrete ini-tiatives for the next decade to build a competitive transport

everything comes down to… more investment?

By Ekin Arslan (TR)

25Committee on Industry, Research and Energy 1 (ITRE 1)

system that will increase mo-bility, remove major barriers in key areas and fuel growth and employment. The demand for transport has been esti-mated at over €1.5 trillion for 2010-2030, while the current value of investments required for developing the trans-Eu-ropean transport network (TEN-T) in the EU is be in the rage of €80-140 billion. Need-less to say, at the moment the investment in transportation infrastructure is nowhere near the estimated cost of such a development.

To cut a long story short: more money is needed. At present, the numbers clearly show that there is a consider-able (!) gap between current and optimal investment in Eu-rope, which can only partly be explained by the current eco-nomic crisis. At first glance, the solution seems simple:

More investment is needed to establish reliable, European Union wide energy commu-nications, transport and and knowledge infrastructures to cater to the future market needs. However, “A Budget for Europe 2020” promises a fund of €40 billion to energy, transport and digital infra-structures and the Commis-sion’s research and innovation funding programme proposes an €80 billion investment with ICT as the largest beneficiary. The funds from “Connecting Europe Facility” grants al-most €9.2 billion from 2014 to 2020 on pan-European proj-ects to give EU citizens and businesses access to high-speed broadband networks and the services that run on them. And when many other investments are provided by both public and private sec-tors already, the simplicity of the solution disappears.

More investment is needed in almost every technology that will make life easier and sustainable – this is no news. However, when EU is already pushing its limits in invest-ments in infrastructure proj-ects, would it not be wiser to focus on other problematic areas on the path to develop sustainable energy, com-munications, transport and knowledge infrastructures, instead of unrealistically and almost shamelessly asking for more investments? Similarly, it is also lazy to stay passive while waiting for the money to come, when there are oth-er serious barriers stopping Europe from becoming better connected for a better future market. •

26

When outgoing World Bank president Robert Zoenick

was asked if the latest Euro-pean nightmare was Spain, he aptly replied: “There’s no short-age of things that can give you insomnia”. European banking policy makers are no strangers to sleeplessness: despite their thorough proposal for a Bank-ing Union, they face skepticism from all sides. While the rough history of the European mon-etary union and unreliability of the European Banking Agency is discouraging, the newest proposal could represent the dawning of the Eurozone crisis. Many criticisms and reserva-tions are justified, but just as easily taken apart: here are five of the most common ones.

1. “Berlin’s resistance to Eurozone debt sharing sug-gests it will be unwilling to bail out Spain’sdepositors.”

Countries in southern Eu-rope would most likely not find themselves in such pre-carious situations had Ger-many and France not given them huge loans during the boom. While most of the blame rests on the Spanish government and investors with poor judgment, Ger-man banks are the ones that remain vulnerable: by “bail-ing out Spain’s depositors”, they are actually protecting their own lenders. In fact, Germany is an advocate of the banking union: if they are able to oversee and advise the system, this eliminates sub-stantial anxieties about how their funding is being used by financially weaker members.

2. “Pan-European regula-tion would make it easier for parent banks to drain liquidity from their often well-fundedcentral european subsidiar-ies.”

This fear is particularly rife in Poland and the Czech Re-public: there are few bank-ing problems and savingis favored, but large western-European banks, e.g. Uni-Credit, make up almost 90% of the sector. Hence, it is a rational concern that in times of trouble, Italy would reach towards stable central Europe. But a banking union does not imply that subsid-iaries will have no say about plans for liquidity with regard to their parents. If anything, it should make it easier for the voice of host countries’ supervisors to be heard.

Banking Union: breakthrough or breakdown?

By Cecilia Mihaljek (CH)

27Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)

More a matter of technicality than opinion, this statement is only true to a certain extent.

3. “Fiscal union” is a weighted term, implying integrated government saving and spending policies.

Politically, economically and realistically speaking, this is impossible, and thus it is tempting to write off the bank-ing union with it. Neverthe-less, a closer look at Brussels’ proposal is reassuring: the funding of deposit insurance is solely up to banks, leaving only cross-border bank resolu-tion to the European taxpayer. While the portion of govern-ment revenue going towards the monetary union will have to increase, this has nothing to do with Danes and Romanians paying the same VAT. Further-more, the supervision will be limited to banks, i.e. the

monetary union; fiscal policy will remain an autonomous matter.

4. Moral hazard: “If banks ‘know that they will be bailed out when in great difficulty, they have an incentive to of-fer riskier loans.”

I am still waiting for an empiri-cal study that actually proves the existence of moral hazard – in the meantime, it is safe to say that no bank approaches its finances with government bailout as a backup plan. Re-gardless, the banking union cannot be accused of providing a pan-European safety net for irresponsibility. Due topolitical pressure, it is difficult for individual governments to let their national institutions fail, but international objectiv-ity and scrutiny would circum-vent this dilemma altogether.

5. “Time.”

There is no way to refute the claim that the banking union will not be created overnight – considering that the crisis is bedded on years of irresponsi-bility, this is hardly surprising. But if policy-makers can mas-ter a gradual approach whilst maintaining a sense of urgen-cy, they will have developed their own sleeping pill. •

28

A couple of years after we saw the United States suf-

fer an economic meltdown proportional to that of the Great Depression, Europe is finding itself on the verge of a similar disaster. News is filled with reports on the fiscal crisis, unemployment and the current inability of governments to cope with it. The international scope of the economic crisis makes it an even more urgent of an issue. Many have turned to emergency measures in the hope of quickly stabilising the situation. This means that enormous amounts of financial means are handed out without paying attention to social consequences.

The results of recent elec-tions across Europe show that people, too, want a change in direction. The question stands whether there is an effective way of using welfare reforms to improve the deterrent state of many European countries. Or even more importantly, will it be fast enough?

In most cases the dissatisfac-tion is caused by unemploy-ment, which in the time of crisis, is getting increasingly severe. However, it is by no means easy for a country hit by a crisis to provide people with enough workplaces, as both the public and private sector are facing financial losses and are forced to make redundancies. The situations such as the one Europe is in at the moment require not only acting on removing the conse-quences of the crisis, but also coming up with long-term

no princes here, only paupersBy Nives Kaprocki (RS)

29Committee on Employment and Social Affairs 1 (EMPL 1)

solutions that would prevent potential problems in the fu-ture.

That being said, reforming the labour market should also be approached through edu-cational reforms. Although the effects of such measures may not be immediate, they can be implemented right away and have a major in-fluence on students’ course choices in the near future. The research speaks for it-self. There is a lack of 300,000 engineers in Germany, with new work places created in the ICT sector every day. The need for people proficient in health and social care, as well as green economy, is rising, too. Before moving on with educational and then finan-cial reforms, this all should be taken into serious consid-eration.

Another issue that Europe has been trying to cope with for years is the challenges of an ageing population. Struc-tural changes in the labour market would aid progress as information technology could play a major role in assisting older people to more fully take part in work life, offering many a pos-sibility to work from home. If an increasing number of older people learnt how to make use of IT, thus beating negative stereotypes set by younger generations, theywould not only be able to have access to information and different services, but would also become economi-cally more active.

A complex issue needs a complex and well-struc-tured solution. The issue of unemployment and the labour market structure is

by all means complex and widespread. When it is the well-being of a population at stake, there are no measures too large or small to be taken into considerationwhen dealing with problems that can in the end have a major effect on all areas of life. For that reason, different national governments have to cooperate to solve them, and not drift further apart. We cannot solve problems with the same way of think-ing we have been used to. The time has come for things to change. •

30

One may think that Europe is facing bigger problems

than the abstract “demo-graphic change”, being con-fronted with the challenges of a long lasting financial crisis that evolved into a pan Eu-ropean crisis. Europe’s finan-cial and economic struggle is calling attention all over the globe. In contrast, ageing is a long-term process; Europe’s hair turning grey is left nearly unnoticed.

The continent has enjoyed a comfortable and unique ascent within the last 50 years and yet no one believes in the fright-ening scenario of the harsh consequences the predicted demographic change can bring along. The problem is some-thing of a blur to be considered in the faraway future.

On the contrary, demo-graphic change cannot be more relevant than it is now. The time has come to flat-ten and reduce the grave impact on Europe’s overall welfare that accompanies the ageing process in all Eu-ropean societies. A brief look on official statistics helps to learn about the extent of the problem, a problem that af-fects especially the genera-tion aged 30 and younger: the predicted median age will rise from approximately 38 years nowadays to 52 in

2050; this means a realign-ment of interests and needs in all terms of society and economy. According to EU’s 2009 Ageing Report, more than 61 million Europeans will be older than 80 by the year 2060. The working pop-ulation will decrease simul-taneously.

The time of the clearly vis-ible pyramid shape of the age distribution chart in Eu-ropean countries is certainly over; Europe’s graph threat-ens to end up as a ballot box. The main principle of social insurance systems – the in-tergenerational contract – is in danger and seems unsus-tainable in the light of work-er pension rates decreasing to 1:1 by 2050.

europe is turning greyBy Jonathan Engel (DE)

31Committee on Employment and Social Affairs 2 (EMPL 2)

What should the eU do?

Most European welfare sys-tems secure pensioners all over Europe with their safe “sunset years”.

However, employment and social policy are tradition-ally national sovereignties. Europe is facing a variety of legal frameworks. The Lisbon treaty emphasises the general need for harmonised and co-ordinated policies in the field of labour market conditions and employment strategies to maintain and strengthen one of the main guidelines in each and every society: intergenera-tional equity.

Welfare systems all over Eu-rope must be reformed. If not, all European welfare states will certainly struggle, suffering from a huge lack of social secu-rity contributions.

In other words, our social wel-fare systems will only survive if mainly social security con-tributions and fertility rates can be lifted, and meanwhile unemployment rates, espe-cially youth unemployment lowered.

It does not take a lot of creativ-ity and “thinking outside the box” to conclude that age-re-lated spending will go through the roof. What does this mean for the strong European do-mestic market? It means a realignment of demands. The average customer aged 52 definitely has different inter-ests from that of a 37-year-old, keeping in mind that the num-ber of people aged 65+ will have doubled by 2060 (from 85 million in 2008 up to 151 million). The European market for age-related products will grow, translating into a boom-ing future for economic sectors

which are nowadays not as im-portant and big as they will be in future times.

2012, the European Year for Active Ageing and Solidar-ity between the Generations, opens a chance to discuss the obstacles and challenges as well as opportunities and the potential that an ageing conti-nent is exposed to.

The time to raise continent-wide awareness to a future problem is now.•

32

33

A teaser, a spoiler: tallinn will see a new speech at the General Assembly

By Jonas Dreger (DE)

This article tells you nothing in concrete, but it will make your mouth water. Tallinn 2012 will see a new speech at the General Assembly (GA), a speech that has never been tried at an International Session. It has, however, been trialled before. Instead of telling you much about it, we thought we would give the word to those who have experienced it before and still remember it: “Contrary to the GA speeches, I do remember all of the Horizon Speeches.” But why, you may ask? One Delegate at this session had the answer: “They brought passion in the House”, whereas another felt that they were “an inspiring interruption” that was “really helpful for raising up everyone’s spirit”.

The speeches were considered “a practical example of intriguing public speaking” and“a cultural insight, a sharing of ideas from like-minded peo-ple”. Some compared the speeches to “little TED talks” (check them here, if you don’t know them: Drew Dudley: Everyday leadership [6 minutes]). Many felt that the fact that “Chairs and Journos shared their opinions (…) was tremendously interesting”, whereas those Delegates who delivered a speech “loved (…) that they gave everybody an opportunity to share their story, their vision or their dream.” Some speakers claimed that it was “the most important speech that I have ever held.” Some even went as far as saying that “they stressed (…) the strength of our generation” and were “a nice ‘competition’ to the inspirational speeches of the President”.

In any case, many claimed that it was a true “breeze of fresh air” ”to speak on topics not covered by Resolutions to truly inspire”. In short, this new addition to the GA was perceived as “this one thing at a session where everybody is completely free”, also because “the freedom to choose the topic (...) inspired also the speaker.” •

The Issue 0 is brought to you by:

Sandra Stojanović, editorMichal Korzonek, editorKonrad Staeger, editorial assistantKarin-Liis Lahtmäe, editorial assistantLiva Kreislere, editorial assistant

Ekin Arslan, journalist Randolf Carr, journalist Arnolds Eizenšmits, journalist Jonathan Engel, journalist Aida Grishaj, journalist Sandra Harney, journalist Nives Kaprocki, journalist Felix Makarowski, journalist Elisa Martinelli, journalist Cecilia Mihaljek, journalist Jan Nedvidek, journalist Ilias-Marios Oikonomou, journalist Erdem Osman Topçu, journalistSaki Shinoda, journalist

and Jonas Dreger, president

Follow us on:

TALLINN2012 is organised by:

TALLINN2012 is sponsored by: