European Union

The world is facing widespread famine "of biblical proportions" because of the coronavirus pandemic, the chief of the UN's food relief agency has warned, with a short time to act before hundreds of millions starve, the Guardian reports. More than 30 countries in the developing world could experience widespread famine, and in 10 of those countries there are already more than one million people on the brink of starvation.

Now isn't the time for "blame games", but "a full understanding of the epidemiology of coronavirus will be essential" in future, EU foreign relations chief Josep Borrell said Wednesday, reacting to Australian calls for an inquiry into alleged Chinese cover-ups. "The priority now has to be saving lives," Borrell said. EU states, led by France, were to launch humanitarian "air bridges" to help African states get medical supplies, he added.

Plans, due in mid-May, for how to resume air travel in Europe will include social-distancing rules, guidelines on masks, and plane disinfections, EU transport commissioner Adina Valean said Wednesday on social media. "I cannot say right now when this [resumption of air travel] is going to start happening because we have to listen to the advice of the health specialists," she said. The air-travel industry also fears post-pandemic price wars.

Airlines in Europe have applied for €12.8bn government support since the start of the coronavirus pandemic with no binding environmental conditions attached, according to an analysis of the sector's bailout pleas by the Guardian. The analysis published on Wednesday reveals that five of the airlines seeking or receiving state aid as a result of the coronavirus pandemic have earned more than €1bn in net profits in the past five years.

The €1.1 trillion of bonds the European Central Bank (ECB) is to buy from pandemic-distressed EU states this year must be purchased at market prices, not directly from governments at fixed ones, ECB chief Christine Lagarde has said in a letter to an MEP, Reuters reported Wednesday. Direct buying would go against "disciplined budgetary policy," she said. ECB "helicopter" payments for EU households faced too many "legal complexities," she added.

Last year was the hottest-ever in Europe and the hottest 11 out of 12 years in history fell in the past 20 years, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, an EU offshoot. Temperatures in 2019 were four degrees Celsius higher than in 2018, with record-breaking heatwaves in France and Germany, it said Wednesday. The figures come as a reminder of climate problems, as pandemic-emergent EU nations restart economies.

The EU has threatened to take action if Israel's new government annexed Palestinian land in the West Bank, Europe's foreign affairs spokesman said Wednesday. "If this proceeds, it will not be left unanswered," Peter Stano said. The EU deemed annexations were "illegal" under international law, he added. The Israeli coalition agreement foresees talks on annexation, a central election promise of right-wing prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to start on 1 July.

The Council adopted new rules to help the most deprived EU citizens during the COVID-19 outbreak.

The Council adopted new rules to support EU fishermen and aquaculture farmers during the COVID-19 outbreak.

The Council adopted conclusions on Mozambique, reiterating its solidarity and support for the country.

The EU is taking exceptional measures to make available cohesion resources to help tackle the pandemic.

Written by Mihalis Kritikos,

© Shutterstock

As the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic intensifies, technological applications and initiatives are multiplying in an attempt to limit the spread of the disease, treat patients and facilitate the work of overworked healthcare workers. At a time when everyone needs better information, including epidemic disease modellers, state authorities, international organisations and people in quarantine, measures such as social distancing, and digital information and surveillance technologies have been unleashed in an unprecedented manner to collect data and reliable evidence in support of public health decision-making.

Countries around the world are authorising clinical trials involving experimental techniques such as gene editing, synthetic biology and nanotechnologies, in a race to prepare and testing future vaccines, treatments and diagnostics. Artificial intelligence, robots and drones are helping to track the disease and enforce restrictive measures while service robots are being deployed in various ways in hospitals.

Bottom-up technologies, such as 3D printing and open-software solutions are being harnessed to address the growing need for medical hardware (e.g. masks, ventilators and breathing filters) and optimise the supply of the necessary medical equipment to hospitals. Blockchain applications can meanwhile track contagion, manage insurance payments related to the disease outbreak, sustain medical supply chains and facilitate the performance of much-needed EU-wide clinical trials in an effective, transparent and credible manner.

At the same time, throughout this pandemic crisis, telehealth technologies have emerged as a cost-effective means to slow the virus’s spread and to maintain hospital capacity, by operating as a triage system, keeping those with moderate symptoms at home and routing more severe cases to hospitals.

But are these technologies safe and effective in the context of Covid-19? Have they been tested before in a public health emergency context? Are they ready to provide tangible and operative solutions that could facilitate governments’ efforts to address the many challenges associated with this pandemic? Do they strengthen the evidence-based character of the response measures taken worldwide? Can possible regulatory hurdles concerning their authorisation be by-passed via ad hoc fast-track procedures? Does their extensive or immediate use involve risks and threaten our values and rights in the long run?

EPRS in-depth analysis

This well-timed EPRS publication on the ten technologies central to the fight against Covid-19 offers some well-informed answers to these crucial questions. More importantly, it constitutes a much-needed analysis of what is at stake, amid the Covid-19 pandemic, in technological terms world-wide, paying particular attention to applications that have either been put in use or are being tested before operational deployment.

The analysis presents a non-exhaustive overview of the technologies currently in use, highlighting their main features and significance in the response to the coronavirus pandemic but also their possible limitations. It examines a wide range of technological applications developed to monitor and contain the rapid spread of the disease but also to ensure that public health institutions maintain their capacity to meet the ever-increasing needs generated by the pandemic.

However, given that most of these technological applications have been mainstreamed or put forward in a hasty decision-making environment where decisions are extremely reactive, careful thought must also be given to their potential repercussions. In the context of the current pandemic, governments have launched numerous data-collection and location-tracking technological applications by means of emergency laws that involve the temporary suspension of fundamental rights, triggering questions about the potential future impact on hard-won civil liberties and concerns about state authorities maintaining heightened levels of surveillance even after the pandemic has ended. Medical devices and in-vitro diagnostics vaccines are meanwhile in the pipeline for fast-tracked authorisation although most of these technologies have never been applied in a medical emergency context before. Furthermore, all this also raises the question of whether the fight against Covid-19 will facilitate even more aggressive automation of daily life when everything returns to ‘normal’.

The analysis addresses the possible lasting legal and ethical questions that policy-makers, legislators and expert groups that advise governments and international organisations and will be confronted with very soon and brings forward some preliminary considerations. It illustrates the main regulatory and socio-ethical dilemmas that the manifold use of these technologies poses when used in a public-health emergency context such as the current one but also those that will arise once the virus has subsided. The analysis identifies the legal challenges that emerging technologies, such as those currently employed in the context of Covid-19 pose to existing EU legislation, examines possible legal gaps and proposes options for the emergency authorisation of some of the technological applications under consideration.

Although the focus of this analysis is on technological applications presenting solutions to pressing pandemic-related problems, this piece of work does not aim to reinforce ideas of techno-solutionism. In other words, technological applications in their own right cannot solve complex societal challenges, such as those associated with the current pandemic. Rather, the main findings of the analysis indicate that technology cannot in itself replace or make up for other public policy measures but it does have an increasingly critical role to play in emergency responses in a variety of domains.

The current crisis has demonstrated not only the vulnerability of global public health systems but also the potential of certain emerging technological pathways to fight this pandemic disease at the levels of prevention, containment and treatment. The first major pandemic of our century, Covid-19 represents an excellent opportunity for policy-makers and regulators to reflect on the legal plausibility, ethical soundness and effectiveness of deploying emerging technologies under extreme time pressure. Striking the right balance will be crucial when it comes to maintaining the public’s trust in evidence-based public health interventions and for safeguarding the potential of promising – albeit immature – technologies to serve the public interest.

Read the complete ‘in-depth analysis’ on ‘Ten technologies to fight coronavirus‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

The European Commission announced on Wednesday (22 April) a €3 billion loan package for ten enlargement and neighbourhood countries to limit the economic fallout of the pandemic.

With a ban on non-essential travel and some countries in complete lockdown, the European tourism sector is looking at a pandemic-imposed collapse in the upcoming summer season. A helping hand from the EU is far from close.

Countries have a chance to choose a new path as societies begin to return to normal after lockdowns imposed to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, activist Greta Thunberg told an Earth Day event on Wednesday (22 April).

European Commission vice-president Frans Timmermans assured MEPs that the new EU Food policy and biodiversity strategy might be delayed by several weeks but no longer, after the launch was pushed back until 29 April.

Recovery from the unprecedented economic crisis requires not only high-level stimulus for listed corporates and increased funding for government agencies but a focus on the often forgotten engine of the economy and our largest employer - Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), writes Tsvetelina Penkova.

BPC Mistral (Antilles et Guyane), BPC Dixmude (Réunion) et BPC Tonnerre (Corse) sont mobilisés.

Tag: BPCOpération Résilience

Written by Issam Hallak,

© nimon_t / Adobe Stock

The crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic has, with tragic consequences, brought to the fore the fact that the European Union (EU) is dependent on non-EU sources for medical equipment such as personal protection equipment (including masks) and artificial respiratory equipment, as well as other products needed in the fight against the virus. In response to shortages, Member States have taken initiatives to produce and distribute medical equipment and the EU has put in place a number of coordinated responses, such as the creation of the rescEU stockpile of emergency medical equipment, and the restriction of exports of personal protective equipment outside the European Union.

A mapping of EU trade in four categories of product – pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, personal protection and medical supplies – shows that, in all four categories, as few as five trade partners provide about 75 % of EU imports. Exports are more diffuse, with five partners receiving approximately half of EU exports. In 2019, the EU was a net exporter of medical products in all four categories, with pharmaceutical products representing most of its trade surplus of medical products. The weaker domain is personal protection products. The main EU import partners are Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States, China, and Singapore, with the first three appearing among the top four countries in all categories. Additional insights into the value chains of chemical and pharmaceutical sector production in the EU’s top five import partners suggest that China and other countries provide a far larger share in raw materials and manufacturing than direct imports suggest. These results imply that the production of medical products is far more scattered than direct import numbers would suggest.

Read the complete briefing on ‘EU imports and exports of medical equipment‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

As EU leaders gather for a crucial summit on Thursday, a radical rethink of the next seven year EU budget is needed, argues Margarida Marques.