Mediaboss Marketing

New research has forecast the European Union's population will plummet by millions more than previously predicted.

The United Nations has said the number of people in the bloc will drop to 365 million by 2100, down from 446 million today.

But a new study, published in the medical journal The Lancet, predicts it will fall more sharply, to 308 million by the end of the century.

Scientists, mostly from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, forecast the fertility rate the number of children per woman on average will drop to 1.41 in the EU. Previous UN estimates had put the figure at 1.75.

The new analysis predicts that Earth will be home to 8.8 billion people by 2100, with global growth peaking in 2064 at a population of 9.7 billion. Previous UN projections forecast 10.8 billion.

Global fertility rates have steadily declined since the 1960s. According to the online publication Our World in Data's study, this can be put down to three factors: "The empowerment of women (increasing access to education and increasing labour market participation), declining child mortality, and a rising cost of bringing up children (to which the decline of child labour contributed)."

The authors of the new study add another reason for the global trend of declining fertility: "Educational attainment and access to contraception."

Women in the EU27 are generally now having fewer children when they are younger, choosing to have them when they are older, which reduces the potential number of children possible on a biological level, according to Eurostat.

By 2100, 21 out of the 27 EU Member States will see their populations decline, the study predicts. Some countries like Bulgaria, Latvia, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Spain will probably even see their populations reduce by more than half by 2100 up to a 77% decline for Latvia.

The figures show that 15 of the EU's countries, including Italy, Greece, Hungary, Poland and Portugal, are already experiencing a decline.

Five countries (Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, and Luxembourg) will gain in population size by 2100, despite a reduction in speed of growth. Scientists attribute these small rises to a relatively steady fertility rate and positive net migration forecast in these countries.

Alongside mortality and migration, fertility is a significant figure for demographers. "Many variables have an effect of this rate," says Catherine Scornet, an Aix-Marseille University lecturer in sociology and demography.

"They can either be direct: the marriage age, the access to birth control methods, the right to abortion" or indirect. "Providing school education to women will also lead them to be fulfilled other than through their role of mothers," she says, and therefore impact the fertility rate.

This too is a worldwide trend. By 2100, 183 countries out of 195 in the study will have a fertility rate lower than the global replacement level (2.1), it predicts. The replacement level is the total fertility rate (the average number of children born per woman) at which a population exactly replaces itself from one generation to the next, without migration.

As many as 23 countries are forecast to have their populations reduced by more than half between 2017 and 2100.

Globally India, Nigeria, China, the U.S. and Pakistan are predicted to have the largest populations in 2100 with 1.09 billion, 791 million, 732 million, 336 million and 248 million inhabitants respectively.

Fertility rates can have a major impact on the political and economical life of the inhabitants of countries, as they determine the number of working-age individuals.

These analyses are extremely important for leaders because they help them assess tomorrow's needs when it comes to infrastructures, job creation, food production and housing among other factors.

The new study has used forecasting of the working-age population to establish a ranking of the top 25 national economies over time.

It predicts that China will rise to the top of this list in 2035 but will be superseded by the U.S. again in 2098, thanks to immigration making up for the country's fertility rate being lower than the replacement level.

A shift in population, and therefore workforce, can cause new domestic policies an ageing population may mean a country has to reconsider its retirement system, for example.

The study's findings suggest that the ratio of the "population older than 80 years to the population younger than 15 years will increase in countries with more than 25% population decline," adding the "economic and fiscal consequences that will be extremely challenging".

According to Eurostat, people who are 65+ in the European Union represented 16,11% of the population in 2008, which rose to 19.06% in 2018.

"The prospect of seeing a country's population reducing for a leader is not always good news. However, this may be felt as opportune nowadays since the impact on natural resources would be lessened," Scornet notes.

Researchers chose not to include climate change as a factor in their prospects because of the "challenges" incorporating it represented.

However, they recognised that it "is likely to have a role in future migration patterns, with populations being forced to migrate because of sea-level rise, extreme weather events, environmental degradation, and more."

Factors like global warming will have a major impact on fertility, mortality, and, as we have already seen, migration.

"What is plausible within a generation is far less plausible within an 80-year range of time," Scornet said. However, such studies have the merit of addressing issues that will be essential in the future.

The study concludes by putting forward the many limitations of work on demographics. "Population size and composition are not exogenous factors for countries to account for in their planning, but rather outcomes that they can help direct," researchers said.

Read more from the original source:
New study forecasts the EU's population will plummet by millions more than expected - Euronews

In brief

Recommended actions

In depth

On 16 July 2020, the European Commission announced the launch of a sector inquiry into the market for consumer products and services linked to the Internet of Things (IoT).

The Commission defines IoT broadly. The sector inquiry is likely to cover any consumer facing system connecting physical or virtual objects to other objects or the internet. This includes smart home appliances and wearables (e.g., fitness trackers or smart watches). Commissioner Vestager says voice assistants are at the centre of this: theyre a new interface between consumers and products/services, and there is a question as to how choices are presented to consumers over this medium. Connected cars are not in scope (the Commission is considering Standard Essential Patents in that area, but separately).

The Commission believes consumers will only see the full benefits of IoT if markets stay open and competitive. The Commission wants to act quickly before tipping points are reached, although arguments exist that a market tipping may be beneficial if it results in more efficient products. This is an area of key concern for the Commission, and a concept being used to support the need for a New Competition Tool. The Commission views data as a key ingredient for competition in the wider technology sector. The Commission is concerned that producers of devices and assistants can collect vast amounts of data, and firms may then misuse this data to cement their market power, or otherwise harm competition to the detriment of consumers, through e.g., self-preferencing (directing users to their own products), or exclusive deals (sending consumers to preferred partners and limiting choice). Interoperability between devices will also be crucial.

What are Sector Inquiries?

Sector inquiries are in-depth reviews of particular markets with significant opportunities for stakeholder participation through consultations and working groups. Our experience of the recent e-commerce sector inquiry is that it led to a widespread re-examination of industry practices and is credited as the source of a major renaissance in enforcement against distribution arrangements. The Commissions new Vertical Agreements Guidelines will also be heavily influenced by the outcome of that study.

Lengthy questionnaires and tight deadlines

The Commission will invite comments from both businesses selling smart products and those selling services that can be accessed through these devices. Questionnaires are currently being sent out to approximately 400 companies worldwide asking about products they sell, how the market works, how data is collected/used/monetized, how products and services work together and any problems with making them interoperable. The questionnaires are lengthy which is also consistent with our experience advising clients on the e-commerce inquiry. Deadlines will be tight and companies should monitor mailboxes including generic mailboxes that the Commission may have found on company websites that may not ordinarily be monitored. We expect the Commission to follow up with companies that do not respond.

Report Process and the Potential for Future Enforcement Action

A preliminary report will be published in Spring next year, with a final report published in 2022. The sector inquiry will identify potential competition law breaches, but will also identify information that will feed into regulatory initiatives affecting IoT, as well as sending a powerful message to companies that the Commission is watching them. Commissioner Vestager noted in the press conference that the Commission may take enforcement action in certain areas before the inquiry is concluded where speed is of the essence.

The Commission has the ability to undertake unannounced inspections against companies in the context of sector inquiries, as such companies who receive questionnaires as part of the IoT sector inquiry should make sure their dawn raid guidance and internal processes are up to date. In addition, companies should expect to see targeted investigations under either Article 101 and/or 102. Whilst these individual investigations often start after the conclusion of the sector inquiry, as we have seen in the ecommerce sector inquiry, the Commission has previously launched investigations whilst the sector inquiry is ongoing. It is therefore a very important opportunity for companies to review their existing business practices to verify antitrust compliance.

Background and the Commissions Wider Policy Initiatives

The Commissions focus on IoT complements its broader Digital Single Market and Data Strategies, at the heart of which lie an ambition to ensure European businesses and citizens can take full advantage of the benefits of increased digitalisation and data collection. The Commissions Digital Strategy, published in February, forewarns a fitness check of existing competition rules to ensure their appropriateness to the digital economy. Problems are intended to be addressed through a Digital Services Act Package. The sector inquiry will complement the newly launched consultations on revising e-commerce rules, introducing new powers to govern platforms and introduction of a New Competition Tool (links to these consultations can be found on the Commission Digital Single Market landing page hyperlinked above). The package of proposals in their current form advocate ex ante regulation potentially compelling broader data sharing by stronger market players.

The Commission thinks there are significant advantages to data being pooled and shared widely, including facilitating the development of new products and services, of data analytics and machine learning, and allowing the emergence of data-driven ecosystems. The Commission wants to examine whether European businesses are being locked out of this new market. Other questions which will be addressed by the present inquiry will include practical points around the degree of interoperability between devices collecting data, standard setting, and licensing.

The inquiry also dovetails with the Commissions White Paper on AI, published in February, and which provides insight into the Commissions view on introducing a legislative regime to govern AI, which might include requirements to ensure quality and verifiability of underlying datasets (BM insight here).

The launch also comes days after the publication of the UK Consumer and Markets Authoritys final report in its online platforms and digital advertising market study. While IoT was not a specific focus of that study, the underlying theories of harm and concerns around concentration of market power along with themes such as the balancing act between protection of personal data and the need for businesses to access more data in order to compete will likely also be central to this new sector inquiry.

The rest is here:
European Union: European Commission Launches a Sector Inquiry into the Consumer Internet of Things - Lexology

The executive branch of the European Union is changing its stance on how EU countries should vote on the World Health Organizations cannabis scheduling changes in December, Hemp Industry Daily has learned.

The development comes on the heels of the European Commission announcing its preliminary view that CBD extracted from the flowering tops of the Cannabis sativa L. plant should be considered a narcotic under a 1961 United Nations treaty.

If the Commissions new stance is formally adopted, hemp-derived CBD would no longer be considered food, would fall outside the scope of the blocs novel food regulation and could be banned from the EU market.

The EU Novel Foods Catalogue was updated in January of 2019 to include hemp-derived cannabinoids, including CBD. The designation means that manufacturers need to have their CBD supplements and edible products evaluated for consumer safety and seek permission from EU authorities to place them on the market.

EU authorities have received more than 50 applications for the novel food authorization of hemp-derived products, notably CBD.

The review of these applications has been suspended, with letters containing the EU executive bodys new preliminary stance on extracted CBD sent to affected novel food applicants on July 3-10, a Commission spokesman told Hemp Industry Daily.

The Commission spokesman, who wasnt authorized to give his name, told Hemp Industry Daily that the agency informed CBD applicants of its preliminary views and invited comments through early September.

He did not elaborate on how soon after the September deadline applicants can expect a response on the validity of their applications.

UK holds to novel food status

The UKs Food Standards Agency said thenations Home Office has not changed its view that CBD extracts themselves are not considered narcotics.

In keeping with previous plans, the FSA will begin accepting novel food applications from January 2021, after the Brexit transition period ends, Lisa Nelson, the agencys senior communications official, told Hemp Industry Daily.

The European Commission remains the route for formal submissions until that time, Nelson said.

Perplexing timing

While the commissions treat CBD as narcotic stance is itself not shocking, it is extremely puzzling why they have come forward with this position now, said Eveline Van Keymeulen, a Paris-based attorney at Allen & Overy.

According to Van Keymeulen, precedent for the commissions view of CBD can be found in the European Commissions proposal for how EU countries should vote on the WHO cannabis scheduling recommendations this December.

What is very surprising is the timing, said Van Keymeulen. Weve had novel food status for two years, and after interacting with so many member states and authorities, and updating the [Novel Food] Catalog several times, what they are doing now is totally backpedaling.

No one really knows why the European Union wants to ban hemp extracts at all which would mean the definitive end of the hemp food industry except for hemp seeds, said Kai-Friedrich Niermann, an attorney based in Germany who specializes in CBD and cannabis regulations. That cant be the solution and that cant be the future.

Niermann, a member of the European Industrial Hemp Association, said he believes that the EIHAs lobbying efforts will persuade the commission to take a stance more favorable to the hemp industry.

United EU stance?

Later this year, the 53 member states of the U.N. Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND) will hold a vote on whether to revise how cannabis and related substances are scheduled in two international narcotics conventions.

In December 2019, the European Commission issued a proposal for a united position on the WHO scheduling recommendations, saying EU member states eligible to vote on the CND should support three of the six cannabis-related changes.

The WHO recommendations that the commission did not support included two specifically related to CBD:

On these two issues, the European Commission proposed that EU countries take the position that the recommendation should not be put to vote and further assessment by WHO should be requested.

It now appears that the commissions stance on the six WHO recommendations is being revised. Responding to a question on whether the December 2019 commission proposals remained valid, a commission spokesman told Hemp Industry Daily: The European Commission is currently working on a proposal for a Union position, to be adopted by the Council, ahead of the vote in December.

The European Union as a bloc has observer status on the CND but cannot vote.

The Union position should be expressed by the Member States that will be members of the CND in December 2020, acting jointly in the interest of the Union within the CND, the spokesman said.

When the CND votes in December, 13 of the 53 countries casting ballots will be members of the European Union:

Ahead of the vote, the CND scheduled a series of meetings to consult on the WHO proposed scheduling changes. Recommendations 5.4 and 5.5 were discussed at a virtual meeting on June 24-25. During that meeting, most of the EU member countries present remained silent.

A second topical meeting is scheduled to be held virtually on Aug. 24-25.

Decisive court ruling

The fate of CBD on the European market may rest not with the European Commission but with a critical court ruling due out before the end of the year.

The so-called Kanavape case originated with a dispute in France over the companys marketing of a CBD vape product whose contents were imported from the Czech Republic.

Two Kanavape employees were convicted of a criminal offence by a Marseille court on the grounds that the CBD oil in product they were marketing was extracted from the whole hemp plant, including the leaves and flowers something prohibited under French law.

In May, an adviser to the Court of Justice of the European Union said Frances ban on the marketing of hemp-derived CBD products contradicts EU law on the free movement of goods. Crucially, the advocate general grounded his non-binding opinion on the understanding that hemp-derived CBD is not classified as a narcotic drug and is therefore protected by the EUs free movement principle.

The Court of Justice ruling on the case is expected this fall, as early as September. In the majority of cases, the court follows the opinion of the advocate general.

While such judgment may not directly prevent the Commission to maintain its conservative view, it would be very hard to reconcile this positionwhich would effectively shut down the EU market for CBD food productswith the principles set forth in the AGs opinion, Van Keymeulen said.

As I do not believe the Commissions position is sustainable in the long run, and this position will become increasingly difficult to defend the more scientific evidence on CBD becomes available, I would generally recommend companies to continue preparing their Novel Food applications, and in particular continue the studies that are necessary to prove the safety of CBD in food products, she said.

If companies have not yet started the application process, and want to err on the side of caution, they may want to await the CJEU judgment and the vote of the CND in Decemberhoping the vote will not be postponed once againto get a better sense of the direction ahead.

Monica Raymunt can be reached at[emailprotected]

Visit link:
EU Commission revises stance on WHO cannabis scheduling vote as it leans toward CBD as a narcotic - Hemp Industry Daily

Turkish defense minister Hulusi Akar said on Tuesday that Turkeys goal is still to join the European Union (EU), nearly four years after negotiations were suspended.

Turkey has been in often-contentious negotiations to join the EU for decades. The European Parliament and European Council voted to freeze the talks after mass purges by the Turkish government in 2016.

European-Turkish tensions have risen even more in recent months over Turkish foreign policy and the migration crisis. Akar told the Turkish Heritage Organization by video conference that Turkey is still interested in becoming a European state despite the strained relationship.

Membership in the EU remains our political objective, the defense minister said. Turkeys EU relationships are deep-rooted, multidimensional, and crucial, not only for Turkey and the EU, but also for the whole region.

He said that Turkish membership would be the best investment for the European Union, citing extensive economic relations with the EU.

Akar also defended the purges that led to the end of EU accession negotiations.

The Turkish government rightfully took the necessary and proportionate measures to suppress and defeat [a coup attempt] and bring its perpetrators to justice, he said.

Turkey faced a military mutiny in July 2016, which authorities blamed on Pennsylvania-based Islamic televangelist Fethullah Glen.

The government fired hundreds of thousands and jailed thousands of suspected Glen supporters. Human rights critics have described the purge as a crackdown on political dissent, but Akar said that it was necessary to cleanse the state of terrorists.

Akar also emphasized Turkeys role in defending Europe as part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

NATO is central to Turkeys security, and Turkey is central to NATO, he said. Our commitment to NATO is solid, and we will continue to shoulder our fair share of the burden.

The defense minister pointed out that Turkey has contributed the fifth-most troops and seventh-most money to NATO operations, calling these contributions essential to Euro-Atlantic security.

Turkey has recently attempted to mend its relationship with the United States and other NATO allies as the Turkish military confronts Russian-backed forces in Syria and Libya.

Nevertheless, Europe might not be so interested in rebuilding the alliance.

European leaders responded forcefully after Turkey attempted to push refugees into Greece amid a round of fighting in Syria, and an EU anti-smuggling naval task force has actually attempted to reduce Turkeys involvement in Libya.

France has led the charge to push back against Turkish foreign policy, supporting Greece and Cyprus in their maritime disputes with Turkey.

It is unacceptable that the maritime space of [EU] member states be violated and threatened, French president Emmanuel Macron told reporters last week. Those who are doing that must be sanctioned.

Matthew Petti is a national security reporter at the National Interest. Follow him on Twitter: @matthew_petti.

Image: Reuters.

Visit link:
Turkish Defense Minister: Turkey Still Wants To Join European Union - The National Interest

The narrative is logical:A recoveryfund will strengthenthe European Union, afterits fallinto economic hardship as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and send a signal of solidarity. The strong helpthe weak. Because this kind of solidarity should go hand in hand withgratitude, theprogram should alsothwart Europe'spopulists. The more money from Brussels, the fewervotes for Italian Matteo Salvini and hisanti-EU crew.

DW editor Andreas Noll

Unfortunately, such simplistic equations have rarely worked out in the past. In contrast, onehistorical model is able to shine:Following World War II, the US organized a reconstruction fund for Europe, the legendary Marshall Plan.

However, there is currently little to rebuild in Europe and no food shortages to be addressed. Butthere are entitlements that need financing, such asunemployment and reduced work benefits, and pensions and health insurance contributions. Social protections are even more expensive in times of crisis, and national budgets are already under pressure. Yet for these budgetary holes, the EU is conceivably the most unsuitable place to turn.

You cannot discuss unemployment benefits without talking about the duration and amount of assistance needed. You cannot discuss pensions without discussingthe retirement age. No EU member statewants to allow voters outside its bordersto have a say in its budgetary issues and definitely not thecountries that are particularly vocalin asking for assistance.

Politiciansbehind the recovery deal know they can't convey a message of thisstate financing by the bloc being business as usual.They're emphasizing thatit's not about "bad old debts"but "good new debts."That's why future projects aimed at strengthening Europeare being clearly specified.

Of course, no one is thinking of repeating theso-called ghost airports in Spain thatwere built with EU money. But who willguaranteethat things will turn out better this time around? After all, more money needs to be spent in less time.EU citizens are aware of where things might go wrong. Bulgarians,who have been taking to the streets to protest government corruption,fear the injection of money from Brussels will again disappear into shady channels.

In Sofia, Bulgarians have demonstrated against government corruption over the past weeks

At some point, the younger generation will have to pay for this rapid flow of money from Brussels. Greek sociologist Michael Kelpanides evaluatedthis generation's European identity. He undertook the elaborate study where there should beparticularly strongunderstandingfor the needs of others: at the European School in Luxembourg, the oldest such institution on the continent.

His sobering conclusion: "Thecoming together of very heterogeneous national groups, whichpreviously had only superficial knowledge of one other, makes them aware for the first time of just how different they really are. Andthis understanding can lead toconscious detachment instead of cohesion."

Kelpanides' study is only one piece of the puzzle, butit shows that those who believe in the idea of European integration should not asktoo much of its citizens.

EU leaders reached an agreement on a coronavirus recovery plan after record-breaking talks

Now that the die has beencast, the EU should direct money to areas where Europeans will really need more communal strength in the future.Common European defense is one example, butit wasn't given much thought during the recovery plan negotiations,with only 7 billion out of the total 750 billion ($8 billion out of $874 billion)earmarked for thispurpose.

The EU could also carry on with the most beautiful symbol of European solidarity that it displayed during the coronavirus crisis. Several EU countries, plus Switzerland, took in seriously ill COVID-19 patients from overcrowded hospitals in northern Italy and eastern France.

A European register of intensive care beds and the promise that in times of crisis, all EU countries will unbureaucratically help one other out with health care services, hospitalbeds, medication and mask stocks now that would be a historicsign.And asign for which it would not be necessary to put up billboards saying: Financed with funding from the European Union.

The rest is here:
Opinion: EU coronavirus deal is the wrong answer for Europe - DW (English)