EU Fragmentation – Ameritas UK News http://www.ameritas.co.uk/ Sat, 22 Jan 2022 03:02:41 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.8 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/cropped-default1-32x32.png EU Fragmentation – Ameritas UK News http://www.ameritas.co.uk/ 32 32 Bite more than they can chew? French regulator imposes more cookie fines on Big Tech https://www.ameritas.co.uk/bite-more-than-they-can-chew-french-regulator-imposes-more-cookie-fines-on-big-tech/ Fri, 21 Jan 2022 18:03:35 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/bite-more-than-they-can-chew-french-regulator-imposes-more-cookie-fines-on-big-tech/ On the last day of 2021, the French regulator, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), imposed fines on Facebook Ireland Limited, Google LLC and Google Ireland Limited for non-compliance with French privacy law. Datas. The rulings, while somewhat controversial, should give companies more incentive to make sure their cookie policies are in […]]]>

On the last day of 2021, the French regulator, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), imposed fines on Facebook Ireland Limited, Google LLC and Google Ireland Limited for non-compliance with French privacy law. Datas. The rulings, while somewhat controversial, should give companies more incentive to make sure their cookie policies are in order (see here for advice).

What happened?

Fine from Facebook related to users’ difficulty in refusing cookies on facebook.com: for example, refusing cookies required clicking on a page called “Accept cookies”. Facebook was found to have breached French data protection law (which implements the ePrivacy Directive). He was sentenced to a fine of 60 million euros and an injunction to make refusing cookies as simple as accepting them, with a fine of €100,000 per day in the event of non-compliance.

Google’s fine amounted to 150 million euros for google.fr and youtube.com. The CNIL found that it was easier for users to accept all cookies (with one click) than to refuse them (requiring several clicks), affecting users’ freedom of consent. The fine was accompanied by an injunction similar to that of Facebook.

What was the rationale?

The amount of these fines was based on the number of people affected and the “considerable profits…of advertising revenue generated indirectly from the data collected by the cookies”. The CNIL also noted that it had notified Google in February 2021 of its infringement and referred to its previous communications issuing guidelines.

What about the GDPR “one stop shop”?

The CNIL was not deterred from asserting its competence by the cooperation and consistency mechanism of the GDPR (the “one-stop shop” where the “main supervisory authority” of a party – which for both organizations would have been the Irish DPC – is responsible for enforcement actions across the EU). Its rationale was that its enforcement action was based on the ePrivacy Directive, and therefore the GDPR one-stop-shop did not apply.

However, this argument has not been universally approved. CNIL decisions (here and here) indicate that the companies have breached the French provision implementing Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive (according to which consent is the only legal basis for cookies), but also note that the ePrivacy Directive references the GDPR for its definition of consent. As such, some commentators have suggested that action should have been taken in Ireland under the GDPR one-stop-shop – as the businesses themselves have argued. Other comments express concerns about fragmentation within the EU.

That said, the one-stop-shop itself has been criticized (by, among others, EDPS Wojciech Wiewiórowski during a roundtable in 2021). Additionally, the CJEU confirmed in 2021 (in another cookie case involving Facebook, cited in CNIL decisions) that in certain circumstances the GDPR allows any EU national data protection authority – not just the supervisory authority – to pursue a confidentiality action with regard to cross-border data processing where “the subject matter only concerns an establishment located in its own Member State or does not substantially affect data subjects than in that Member State”, or where urgent action is required.

Do cookies insinuate themselves into the application program?

The CNIL has been particularly active recently in their application of cookies. These sanctions follow the previous fines in terms of cookies that it imposed on Google, in particular for 135 million euros in December 2020 (see our Lens article). However, there are reasons to believe that other regulators may begin to follow suit. As cited in the CNIL decisions, the Spanish authority has also imposed several cookie-related sanctions exclusively based on their provisions implementing the ePrivacy Directive (and therefore outside the GDPR one-stop shop). The EDPB set up a cookie banner taskforce in September 2021, partly in response to the noyb cookie project. This privacy campaign group (chaired by Max Schrems) is actively reaching out to organizations and filing complaints with regulators as part of a campaign to increase cookie compliance.

In the meantime, Italian regulator Garante has issued updated guidelines on cookies and other tracking tools, which it deemed necessary in light of trends, including: (i) incorrect implementation of the rules; (ii) numerous complaints received; (iii) the “ever-increasing diffusion of new technologies characterized by an increasing level of ubiquity”; and (iv) the “multiplication” of users’ online identities, where “matching” could allow the creation of “increasingly specific and detailed profiles”.

What about UK organisations?

Although the CNIL justified these large fines due to the reach and advertising revenue of Facebook and Google, other website operators – especially those with operations in France – should take note. UK organizations can also expect the ICO (which regulates the UK ePrivacy regime as well as the UK GDPR) to keep a close eye on its European counterparts when it comes to their enforcement activities in this space.

Internet users in the UK, like those in the EU, will recognize that it is often easier to accept all cookies on a website than to refuse them. Although EU and UK law does not expressly cover this point, the regulator’s guidelines do. The UK cookie guidelines state that emphasizing “accept” or “allow” cookie options over “reject” or “block” cookie options “represents a non-compliant approach”, as the service online influence users towards the “accept” option. .

That said, at present the ICO fine options under the UK ePrivacy Regime (PECR) are more limited than in France. UK PECR fines are capped at £500,000, while French data protection law (which covers both the ePrivacy Directive and GDPR) allows maximum fines of 2% of annual worldwide turnover or 10 million euros. However, this could change in the UK, where these maximum fines are being reviewed as part of the government’s general review of data laws – see our blog for more information.

“complicating the opt-out mechanism actually discourages users from opting out of cookies and encourages them to opt in to the ease of the cookie consent button in the first window”

https://www.cnil.fr/en/cookies-facebook-ireland-limited-fined

]]>
Closing the Gap in NI’s Rail Network – Seven Demands for the West… – Slugger O’Toole https://www.ameritas.co.uk/closing-the-gap-in-nis-rail-network-seven-demands-for-the-west-slugger-otoole/ Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:11:00 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/closing-the-gap-in-nis-rail-network-seven-demands-for-the-west-slugger-otoole/ When Northern Ireland was founded a century ago, an intricate network of railway lines connected every town and city in the jurisdiction. It was an important economic and social legacy from the Victorian era, when all transport was ‘public transport’. In less than 50 years, however, all that had changed. In 1949 the multitude of […]]]>

When Northern Ireland was founded a century ago, an intricate network of railway lines connected every town and city in the jurisdiction. It was an important economic and social legacy from the Victorian era, when all transport was ‘public transport’.

In less than 50 years, however, all that had changed. In 1949 the multitude of private companies which operated individual railway lines across NI were nationalized under the control of Stormont ‘Ulster Transport Authority’ (UTA). The UTA was notoriously anti-rail and immediately began eliminating sections of the network across Northern Ireland. Its first victim was the Belfast and County Down Railway, which linked NI’s largest city to every corner of its second most populous county. Almost all of this line was closed between 1950 and 1955, with only the Belfast-Bangor section surviving.

While UTA’s anti-rail attitude seems myopic to many today, their attitude was not out of step with the mood of the time. The post-World War II era saw a series of social and political changes that began to erode the status and viability of rail transport – particularly the rise of motorized vehicles for individuals, passengers and freight. As the 1950s and 1960s progressed, road transport looked like the future – with major motorways planned and pushed into the center of cities like Belfast. The view at the time was that roads and cars were a liberating force for good – with their negative impacts on pollution, congestion, obesity and the fragmentation of urban areas yet to be understood. However – Northern Ireland being Northern Ireland, suspicions also arose that partisan politics played no small part in decisions about which lines to close at this time. Given that the former one-party regime in Stormont did not treat all of its citizens equally or fairly on such broad issues as housing, voting, education and economic development, it would be naive to think that the only policy area in which they somehow managed to ‘play fair’ was infrastructure. Especially given the power of infrastructure to influence the distribution of people and jobs, against the backdrop of the former Stormont regime’s obsession with religious demographics.

It is therefore not surprising to many that the railroad network west of NI faced the most significant cuts in the 1950s and 1960s. In 1965, all but one railroad in western NI Ulster had been wiped from the map. This removed rail from key towns like Omagh, Enniskillen, Dungannon, Strabane, Cookstown, Limavady and Letterkenny. The only line in the west that survived was the Derry-Belfast route, while the only cross-border service that remained open was Belfast-Dublin in the east. Rail has been phased out entirely from counties Tyrone and Fermanagh in the NI, and from Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan in the south (partly because the closure of lines in the NI made it untenable to maintain their ROI sections). While Derry once sat at the convergence of a complex network of four different rail routes and four stations across the city, by 1965 it had been reduced to a single line – to Belfast – terminating in part predominantly unionist of a majority. -nationalist city. The decimation of Derry’s rail network proved to be one of many catalysts for the growth of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association in the city – whose marches tended to start from the railway station remainder of the city at Duke Street. In this way, the rail closure in the west was one of many political and social threads in the late 1960s that were independently woven together in the fuse that finally blew in 30 years of The Troubles. Since then, the disappearance of infrastructure in West Ulster has been inextricably linked to the region’s economic underperformance.

Not content with its predecessor’s rail closures, in 2004 the post-Good Friday Stormont Assembly decided to clear the last section of rail from the western counties of Ulster. With the railway between Derry and Belfast nearing the end of its lifespan and passenger numbers a fraction of what it is today, Stormont has decided, in his wisdom, that the line was to close north and west of Ballymena. This would have removed rail from key towns like Derry City, Coleraine, Ballymoney and Portrush – while making the likelihood of a future return to Tyrone, Fermanagh or Donegal even less likely. Veteran civil rights activist Eamon McCann helped set up a group called ‘Into The West’ in Derry which successfully campaigned for the ruling to be overturned. Although it should be noted that – 18 years later – the promised STILL track upgrade has not happened, is currently unfunded and has been pushed back to 2027 at the earliest. It appears that rail myopia in the west is a long-standing and endemic affliction among many in Stormont and the NI public service.

The good news is that an opportunity has now arisen to right some of those past mistakes. Rail is experiencing a major renaissance across Europe, and the EU has even declared 2021 its “Year of Rail”. Within the island of Ireland – a place with one of the highest car dependency rates in Europe – rail is no longer seen as an outdated relic. On the contrary, it is increasingly seen as a key part of this island’s transport future – with a vital contribution to make in the fight against climate change, traffic congestion and the rebalancing of population and life. economic activity away from Belfast and Dublin. The Republic in particular has reflected this change in attitude in its new national development plan “Project Ireland 2040”, which makes sustainable mobility a key national objective. While Northern Ireland is often slow to react to the winds of change, even here there has been a palpable shift in attitudes. And now the first-ever all-island rail strategy is being developed to set out a new role and future for rail across Ireland.

The rail review strategy for the entire island was jointly announced last year by NI Infrastructure Minister Nichola Mallon and her southern counterpart Eamon Ryan. The strategy will look at ways to improve the rail network across Ireland as a whole with a particular focus on “better connections to the north-west” of the island, which history has left almost entirely devoid of rail . The review is due to be completed and published by summer 2022 – and as part of this process, a consultation has begun to seek public input.

‘Into The West’ is the campaign group for rail in counties Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh and Donegal. As previously stated, it was set up in 2004 to successfully oppose Stormont’s plan to scrap the Derry-Belfast rail line beyond Ballymena. Into The West won this crucial battle and continued it by also successfully campaigning for the creation of a new railway station in Derry. In recent years, the organization has campaigned for seven major improvements that would revolutionize transport in the North West of the Island – to transport ministers and officials, MPs, MPs, councils, TDs, chambers of commerce and ordinary members of the public. And he has witnessed a fundamental shift in public opinion on this subject over these years. Where once the idea of ​​bringing rail back to places like Omagh, Armagh or Enniskillen was dismissed as a fantasy, it is now seen as essential by many across NI. The lack of even basic infrastructure in counties like Tyrone, Fermanagh and Donegal is no longer tolerated, and people are increasingly demanding change. The West is awake!

If you want to see rail come back and improve in West Ulster, the All-Island Rail Review is the perfect opportunity to make your voice heard. It is essential that as many people as possible in Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh and Donegal use it to demand the expansion and improvement of rail across the West. There will be many contributing voices from across the island demanding that rail be restored or improved in their area as well. So, if we don’t take advantage of this opportunity, there is a danger that the places that scream the loudest will become the main focus of this new strategy. Rail will only expand in the West if people believe it is possible and demand that it happen. We must therefore ensure that the people of Derry, Tyrone, Fermanagh and Donegal speak with a clear and united voice on this key issue for the future of our region.

The seven key improvements that Into The West encourages people to ask for when responding to the Rail Review consultation are:

SEVEN RAILWAY REQUESTS FOR THE WEST

1) Reopen the Derry-Portadown rail line.

(via Strabane/Lifford, Omagh and Dungannon, will create a direct rail route to Dublin from Tyrone, North West and East Donegal).

2) Reconnect Enniskillen to the rail network.

(From Omagh to Enniskillen, and south to Sligo)

3) Faster and more frequent trains between Derry, Coleraine and Belfast

(Including departures every half hour, and fast express service).

4) Connect the 3 NI airports to the rail network.

5) Reopen the Derry-Letterkenny railway line.

(Offering direct trains from Letterkenny to Dublin, via Derry & Tyrone)

6) Connecting Limavady, Ballykelly & Strathfoyle to the rail network.

(Creation of a north-west suburban rail network between Derry and Coleraine).

7) Complete the “Western Rail Corridor” from Limerick to Sligo

(And continue north through Donegal to Derry)

the deadline for submissions to the consultation on the rail review strategy for the whole island is 5 p.m. THIS FRIDAY – 9 p.m.st January 2022.

If you want to see rail return and improve in counties Tyrone, Fermanagh, Derry and Donegal after 60 years of transport isolation, be sure to submit a submission to say so today. And please also ask for the seven “Questions for the West” listed above.

The consultation page is: www.StrategicRailReview.com/Feedback . You can also submit your comments by email to: [email protected]

Steve Bradley is Chairman of ‘Into The West’ – The Rail Campaign for Counties Derry, Tyrone Fermanagh and Donegal.

PS It should be added that Into The West supports and works with other groups campaigning for rail to be restored and improved elsewhere within NI (eg Portadown-Armagh Rail Society). Railworks as a network – so that improvements or expansion in a particular area also benefit the rest of the network. We support all improvements to rail, whether in our geographic area or beyond.

]]>
Global Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market Size, Share, Trends and Future Growth Forecast to 2028 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/global-traditional-chinese-medicine-skin-care-products-market-size-share-trends-and-future-growth-forecast-to-2028/ Sat, 15 Jan 2022 10:09:46 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/global-traditional-chinese-medicine-skin-care-products-market-size-share-trends-and-future-growth-forecast-to-2028/ The Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market research report is a detailed investigation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products industry that specializes in identifying market growth potential. Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products and potential opportunities in the market. Secondary research data comes from government publications, expert interviews, reviews, surveys, and trusted […]]]>

The Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market research report is a detailed investigation of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products industry that specializes in identifying market growth potential. Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products and potential opportunities in the market. Secondary research data comes from government publications, expert interviews, reviews, surveys, and trusted journals. The recorded data spans a decade, followed by a systematic review to conduct an in-depth study of the influencers in the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products market.

The latest Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market research report includes an in-depth analysis of significant factors such as growth enablers, restraints & limitations, and opportunities influencing the revenue flow of the industry over the forecast period. It also examines historical data and ongoing trends for a more accurate assessment of market potential.

Request a sample copy of this report @ https://www.getnewsalert.com/request-sample/3609

According to expert analysts, the industry is poised to accrue substantial returns over the estimated period 2022-2028, registering a CAGR of XX% throughout.

The research literature precisely lays out the market segmentation to determine all the profitable prospects in the business sphere. Additionally, it involves a detailed investigation of the competitive terrain with recent data on acquisitions, partnerships, mergers, and other major developments. With this, the report offers a clear understanding of the winning strategies deployed by leading competitors to help stakeholders formulate action plans that will generate strong profits in the years to come.

Key Features of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market Report:

  • Accounts of total sales, returns and market share
  • Current and upcoming industry trends
  • Profitable prospects
  • Market Growth Rate Assessments
  • Advantages and disadvantages of using direct and indirect sales channels
  • A register of major distributors, resellers and sellers

Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market Segments Covered in the Report:

Geographical fragmentation: North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East and Africa.

  • National level assessment of each regional market
  • Sales Acquired, Returns Accumulated, and Industry Share Accumulated by Each Geography
  • Assessing revenue share and growth rate for each regional market over the estimated period

Type of product : Daub skin care products, dietary supplements and acupuncture

  • Pricing model of each product type
  • Market share assessment considering the sales and returns achieved by each product segment

Application spectrum: Beauty salon, household and others

  • Evaluation of product pricing considering scope of application
  • Revenue and sales generated by each type of application over the forecast period

Competitive Dashboard: Qingdao Longxiang Tianrun Traditional Chinese Medicine Technology Development Co., Ltd, Integrated Chinese Medicine Holdings Ltd., Shanghai Jahwa United Co., Ltd., Solstice Medicine Company, Inc., Yuannan Baiyao and Eu Yan Sang

  • Synopsis of activities of listed companies
  • Product and service offerings from major players
  • Information on pricing models, total revenue, sales, gross margins and market share for each company
  • SWOT analysis of large companies
  • Assessment of commercialization rate and market concentration rate
  • Detailed study of the commercial strategies deployed by leading companies

Research objectives:

  • To understand the structure of Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products market by identifying its various subsegments.
  • Focuses on the key global Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products players, to define, describe and analyze the value, market share, market competition landscape, SWOT analysis and plans. development over the next few years.
  • To analyze the Traditional Chinese Medicine for Skin Care products with respect to individual growth trends, prospects, and their contribution to the total market.
  • Share detailed information on key factors influencing market growth (growth potential, opportunities, drivers, industry-specific challenges and risks).
  • To project the size of Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products submarkets, with respect to key regions (along with their respective key countries).
  • Analyze competitive developments such as expansions, agreements, new product launches and acquisitions in the market.
  • Establish a strategic profile of key players and analyze in depth their growth strategies.
  • Establish a strategic profile of key players and analyze in depth their growth strategies.

Answers to key questions in the report:

  • What is the growth potential of the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products market?
  • Which product segment will take the lion’s share?
  • Which regional market will impose itself as a pioneer in the years to come?
  • Which application segment will experience strong growth?
  • What growth opportunities might arise in the Traditional Chinese Medicine for Skin Care Products industry in the coming years?
  • What are the most important challenges that the Traditional Chinese Medicine for Skin Care Products market may face in the future?
  • Who are the leading companies in the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products Market?
  • What are the key trends that are positively impacting market growth?
  • What growth strategies are the players planning to stay in the Traditional Chinese Medicine Skin Care Products market?

Customization request on this report @ https://www.getnewsalert.com/request-for-customization/3609

]]>
Key Antibody Services Market Players, Competitive Landscape, Statistics, Revenue and Industry Analysis Report by 2028 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/key-antibody-services-market-players-competitive-landscape-statistics-revenue-and-industry-analysis-report-by-2028/ Thu, 13 Jan 2022 12:53:00 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/key-antibody-services-market-players-competitive-landscape-statistics-revenue-and-industry-analysis-report-by-2028/ Emerging research logo Market Size – USD 1.41 Billion in 2020, Market Growth – at a CAGR of 11.1%, Market Trend – Advancements in Healthcare Infrastructure VANCOUVER, BC, CANADA, Jan. 13, 2022 /EINPresswire.com/ — The global antibody services market size is expected to reach USD 3.30 billion in 2028 at a stable CAGR, according to […]]]>

Emerging research logo

Market Size – USD 1.41 Billion in 2020, Market Growth – at a CAGR of 11.1%, Market Trend – Advancements in Healthcare Infrastructure

VANCOUVER, BC, CANADA, Jan. 13, 2022 /EINPresswire.com/ — The global antibody services market size is expected to reach USD 3.30 billion in 2028 at a stable CAGR, according to the latest analysis from Emerging Research. Some of the major factors driving the market revenue growth include growing adoption of targeted immunotherapy, increased focus on pharmaceutical and biological research, rising prevalence of infectious diseases, steady investments from the government and private investors and the growing demand for therapeutic proteins.

The latest and updated research report on Global Antibody Services Market covers comprehensive overview of Antibody Services Market, future economic status, competitive landscape mapping, trends in supply and demand and analysis of production and consumption. The report also covers the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the antibody services market. The pandemic has dynamically affected all aspects of life globally, along with drastic changes in the economy and market conditions. The report covers the currently fluctuating market scenario along with the current and future assessment of the impact of COVID-19. The report includes historical data, company overview, financial condition and necessary information about the new key players in the market.

Get Sample Report @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/request-sample/632

Some key findings from the report:

In February 2021, FairJourney Biologics and IONTAS introduced a protein science division, Flow Eighteen38. The new division will focus on the purification and characterization needs of a wide range of customers, ranging from research institutes and start-ups to biotech and biopharmaceutical organizations.

The antibody development segment is expected to register a CAGR of 11.5% in revenue throughout the forecast period. This can be attributed to the increasing focus on drug discovery and biotechnology research activities.

Asia-Pacific is expected to register the fastest revenue CAGR throughout the forecast period, which can be attributed to the rapid advancements in pharmaceutical and healthcare infrastructure, growing number of biotechnology companies and increasing investment by private investors in the development of antibodies.

The report offers a comprehensive overview of the competitive landscape and covers company profiles, production and manufacturing capacity, product portfolio, expansion strategies and business initiatives such as mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, collaborations, partnerships, product launches and brand promotions, among others. .

Leading Players Analyzed in the Report:

GE Healthcare, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Sartorius AG, Merck KGaA, Pall Corporation, Sigma-Aldrich Corporation, Eppendorf AG, Cellab GmbH, INTEGRA Biosciences AG and FiberCell Systems Inc.

Request Report Discount @https://www.emergenresearch.com/request-discount/632

Further, the report divides the Antibody Services market into key segments and sub-segments to offer an analysis of product type and industry application spectrum. It also offers predictions on which segments are expected to show significant growth over the forecast period.

For the purposes of this report, Emergen Research has segmented the global antibody services market based on service, type, end-use, and region:

Service Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion; 2018-2028)

Antibody development

Antigen preparation

Immunization and production of hybridomas

Antibody characterization

Antibody production and purification

Antibody fragmentation and labeling

Type Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion; 2018-2028)

Monoclonal

Polyclonal

End-Use Outlook (Revenue, USD Billion; 2018-2028)

Bioscience companies

Bioscience research institutions

Hospitals

Others

The report offers a comprehensive breakdown of the regional analysis of the market and subsequent analysis by country. The regional market analysis includes information on production volume, consumption volume and patterns, revenue and growth rate for the forecast period 2020-2028. According to the regional analysis, the market is primarily split across the key geographical regions as follows:

North America (USA, Canada)

Europe (UK, Italy, Germany, France, Rest of EU)

Asia-Pacific (India, Japan, China, South Korea, Australia, rest of APAC)

Latin America (Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Rest of Latin America)

Middle East and Africa (Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, Rest of MEA)

Request Report Customization @https://www.emergenresearch.com/request-for-customization/632

The report covers the key points of the market including the standards, regulations and policy changes applied by the government on the industry for the coming years. The report encompasses in-depth research conducted through the application of advanced analytical tools such as SWOT analysis and Porter’s Five Forces analysis to identify trends and growth patterns. Factors likely to influence market growth, current trends, opportunities, restraining factors, and the business landscape are thoroughly discussed in the market study.

Antibody Services Market Report Overview:

Introduction, Product Scope, Market Overview and Opportunities

Manufacturers Analysis with Sales, Revenue and Price Analysis

Complete analysis of the competitive landscape

Detailed profiling of key competitors along with their business strategies and market size

Regional analysis of the market along with sales, revenue, market share and global position

Country-wise analysis of the market along with types, applications, and manufacturing

Strategic recommendations to established players as well as new entrants

In-depth analysis of Antibody Services industry risks, restraints and limitations

Click here to buy now @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/select-license/632

Thank you for reading our report. Please contact us for more information about the report or report customization. Our team will ensure that the report is best suited to your needs.

Read similar reports by Emergen Research:

Image Recognition Market @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/image-recognition-market

Industrial Control Systems Security Market @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/industrial-control-systems-security-market

Intelligent Transportation System Market @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/intelligent-transportation-system-market

Streaming Analytics Market @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/streaming-analytics-market

Insulation Materials Market @ https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/insulation-materials-market

About Emergen Research

Emergen Research is a market research and consulting firm that provides syndicated research reports, custom research reports, and consulting services. Our solutions are uniquely focused on your goal to locate, target and analyze changes in consumer behavior across demographics, across industries, and help customers make smarter business decisions. We offer market intelligence research ensuring relevant and factual research across multiple sectors including health, touchpoints, chemicals, types and energy. We are constantly updating our search offerings to ensure that our clients are aware of the latest trends existing in the market. Emergen Research has a strong base of experienced analysts from a variety of areas of expertise. Our industry experience and ability to develop a workable solution to any research problem gives our clients the ability to secure an edge over their respective competitors.

Eric Lee
Emerging research
+91 90210 91709
sales@emergenresearch.com
Visit us on social media:
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

]]>
Net Zero Markets to Launch Global Carbon Reduction Contract with EEX and ACX https://www.ameritas.co.uk/net-zero-markets-to-launch-global-carbon-reduction-contract-with-eex-and-acx/ Tue, 11 Jan 2022 11:00:00 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/net-zero-markets-to-launch-global-carbon-reduction-contract-with-eex-and-acx/ LONDON, LEIPZIG, Germany and SINGAPORE, January 11, 2022 / PRNewswire / – Net Zero Markets, a company dedicated to developing risk management, trading and investment products in the global environmental markets space, has signed agreements with the European Energy Exchange (EEX) and AirCarbon Exchange (ACX) to list Global Emission Reduction (GER) ®, Net Zero Market’s […]]]>

LONDON, LEIPZIG, Germany and SINGAPORE, January 11, 2022 / PRNewswire / – Net Zero Markets, a company dedicated to developing risk management, trading and investment products in the global environmental markets space, has signed agreements with the European Energy Exchange (EEX) and AirCarbon Exchange (ACX) to list Global Emission Reduction (GER) ®, Net Zero Market’s flagship contract – an innovative approach to solving the problems of the voluntary carbon market (VCM).[1] The agreements with EEX – a leading exchange for carbon compliance programs around the world – and ACX – a pioneer in the VCM space, headquartered at Singapore – make GER accessible in several time zones to global participants in the voluntary carbon market (VCM).

Thanks to the innovative design of the product, it will be able to be used by compensators, compensatory product retailers, project developers, investors and the wider trading community. Net Zero Markets believes that widespread availability and use is essential to enable the increased liquidity needed to scale the VCM, ultimately supporting the Net Zero goals.

The GER is built on the basis of existing standards with appropriate overlays and innovative features that align with a path to Net Zero. The company expects the GER to gradually be listed on the stock exchange and start trading in early 2022.

Louis redshaw, CEO of Net Zero Markets: “We are delighted to be working with EEX and AirCarbon on the launch of GER. We have developed this product in collaboration with industry participants and believe that its unique and innovative design will achieve the key objectives of promoting liquidity and transparency to ensure funding flows to the projects necessary to achieve Net Zero.

While well-meaning companies have bought and pulled off carbon offsets to play their part in making Net Zero happen, many others are either confused and put off by the complexity of the market, or have later found out that their offsets are unsuccessful. not as effective as they are. had been led to believe.

This has created a dynamic in which companies and other offsets must become experts in carbon markets to be able to do the right thing. Net Zero Markets strongly believes that this is the main reason why the VCM has not reached its full potential. Consumers shouldn’t have to be experts. If effective clearing and removal is to occur on a large scale, buyers need to have confidence and the products need to be straightforward and priced transparently. PRE is designed to deliver all of these things in accordance with the recommendations of the Voluntary Carbon Market Scaling Task Force.[2] It’s the perfect antidote to further market fragmentation. “

Guillaume Pazos, Managing Director of AirCarbon Exchange: “We are extremely excited to be working with the industry leading team at Net Zero Markets. Their extensive experience in commercializing emissions markets, coupled with our leadership position in providing commodity infrastructure to carbon markets, was instrumental in formulating the GER.

The process of creating the underlying GER spot architecture on ACX was developed over a full year. We are now ready to offer the market a simple and elegant solution to the current pursuit of a basic carbon contract. While many try to legislate on a basic contract, GER creates it by offering a comprehensive solution in a single contract. “

Tobias Paulun, Director of Strategy for the European Energy Exchange: “The voluntary carbon market can play a strategic role in achieving the Paris Agreement, in addition to mandatory carbon pricing mechanisms. I am convinced that GER represents the innovation that is needed and expected in voluntary carbon markets.

GER should be offered alongside our existing products for carbon compliance markets in Europe to EEX but also to North America to Nodal Exchange, making them accessible to our global business community.

An integrated offering for the carbon markets, with both Spot and Futures instruments available, is essential to bring the necessary liquidity to the market and increase the VCM. We are delighted to build this new market, with our partners NZM and ACX, but also with our customers. “

[1] Patent pending

[2] The TSVCM is now known as the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM)

Note to editors: NZM and its partner exchanges will publish more details on GER and how it works on exchanges in the coming months.

For more information, please contact Net Zero Markets at [email protected] or visit https://www.netzeromarkets.co.

About Net Zero Markets:

Net Zero Markets is a company dedicated to the development of risk management tools, products and contracts in the global environmental space.

The company’s first products are expected to launch in early 2022. These products will provide the level of transparency and commodification necessary for the development of carbon markets, thereby allowing more funding to flow to the projects needed to meet the net targets. zero.

Together, the team has over 90 years of experience in the carbon and energy markets. The CEO of the company, Louis redshaw, is one of the founding figures of Global Carbon Markets. In 2006, he created a standard for the trading of Certified Emission Reduction (CER) carbon credits that has been adopted by all major market players and carbon exchanges. This initiative enabled a secondary market for CERs to take off thanks to the establishment of liquidity and price transparency.

Louis has fought hard to protect the integrity of carbon markets, including educating peer financial firms and various authorities, including the European Commission, the UK Treasury, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and HM Revenue and Customs ( HMRC) on VAT fraud. Louis most recently served as an expert witness in the Crown Prosecution Service’s criminal proceedings against fraudsters operating in voluntary carbon markets, and in two civil cases relating to VAT fraud. Louis was a director on the boards of: the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), the Climate Markets and Investors Association (CMIA) and Tricorona, on 3e largest developer of carbon projects.

Louis currently runs Redshaw Advisors Ltd, which was recently voted Best Offsets Retailer and Best Trading Company of 2021 (Voluntary Carbon Markets) by readers of Environmental Finance magazine, the industry’s leading publication covering sustainable investing and green finance. .

Louis is a strong supporter of emissions trading and has dedicated his career to promoting the efficiency of carbon markets to achieve not only carbon emissions reductions, but removals as well. Complementing Louis’ in-depth knowledge and understanding of carbon markets, the founding team of Net Zero Markets has extensive experience in trade, structuring and law in product growth in the industry.

For more information, please contact Net Zero Markets at [email protected] or visit https://www.netzeromarkets.co.

About the EEX group

EEX Group builds safe, prosperous and sustainable commodity markets around the world, together with its customers. The group offers the trading of electricity, natural gas, environmental products, freight and agricultural products as well as subsequent clearing and registration services, connecting a network of more than 800 business participants.

The EEX group includes European Energy Exchange (EEX), EPEX SPOT, EEX Asia, Power Exchange Central Europe (PXE) and Nodal Exchange, as well as registry provider Grexel Systems and software companies KB Tech and Lacima. Clearing is provided by the clearing houses of the EEX European Commodity Clearing (ECC) and Nodal Clear group. The EEX group is based in 19 locations around the world and is part of the Deutsche Börse group.

EEX Group is a leading trading group for environmental markets operating emissions trading based on the European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) since 2005 and offering primary auctions in the EU ETS, on behalf of 25 EU Member States. In North America, Nodal Exchange, part of the EEX group, provides the largest portfolio of environmental products, among others, based on cap-and-trade systems of California and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). In addition, EEX and New Zealand Exchange (NZX) hold emissions auctions for the New Zealand Emissions Trading System. More information on: https://www.eex-group.com/fr/

About AirCarbon Exchange

AirCarbon Exchange (“ACX”) is a global exchange that is revolutionizing the voluntary carbon market. The Exchange’s clientele includes legal entities, financial traders, carbon project developers and other industry stakeholders. ACX provides its clients with an efficient and transparent trading platform that is easy to use, frictionless and with the lowest commission fees available on the market. Its underlying technology will allow the carbon market to grow effectively to meet Net Zero’s global ambitions.

Launched in 2019, the Exchange is a hybrid platform with a traditional central order book architecture that will be familiar to all seasoned traders. The exchange also uses the speed and efficiency of the blockchain to achieve the execution, clearing and settlement of atomic T-0 transactions. The stock exchange’s basic matching engine can currently match trades in the order of ~ 10,000 per second.

From May 2021, ACX is the first negative carbon exchange in the world, having offset its carbon emissions 12 months in the future (for May 2022) through the Onil Stoves Guatemala Uspantan project. ACX is committed to continuing to offset all of its emissions over 12 months.

For more information or to trade carbon, please contact [email protected] or visit https://www.aircarbon.co.

SOURCE AirCarbon Exchange; EEX; Net zero markets

]]>
So much for a “world without borders”? Countries mark their territory in cyberspace. https://www.ameritas.co.uk/so-much-for-a-world-without-borders-countries-mark-their-territory-in-cyberspace/ Tue, 04 Jan 2022 16:22:00 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/so-much-for-a-world-without-borders-countries-mark-their-territory-in-cyberspace/ Since the advent of the Internet, politicians from all ideological and national backgrounds have raised the issue of a “borderless” cyberspace. Their perception of a “borderless” digital world exposes the challenges governments face when trying to exercise sovereignty there, if not the impossibility of doing so. Yet while cyberspace facilitates communications that transcend state borders, […]]]>

Since the advent of the Internet, politicians from all ideological and national backgrounds have raised the issue of a “borderless” cyberspace. Their perception of a “borderless” digital world exposes the challenges governments face when trying to exercise sovereignty there, if not the impossibility of doing so.

Yet while cyberspace facilitates communications that transcend state borders, it is not a monolithic space. On the contrary, it always reflects the complexity of the world, and in cyberspace, borders retain their barrier function, but also their porosity. This creates many conflicts between countries because the functioning of cyberspace is subject to physical and geopolitical constraints. However, it is obvious that the digital world, by its inherent characteristics, alters and transforms the traditional vision of borders: the outlines cannot be transposed in the same way as they would be in a geographical space.

In reality, state borders in cyberspace are more complex, more fluid and in perpetual reconfiguration. They can also create nonadjacent spaces which can in some ways overlap.

Testing borders and sovereignty

The discourse on a cyberspace “without borders” unfolded in two periods, carried by two different types of actors for radically different reasons. Despite what the expression implies, the concepts of borders and territories fundamentally structure the discourse.

In the early 1990s, with the birth of the Internet, a utopian story emerges among the pioneers of cyberspace. This story assimilates its characteristics to those of a physical territory: a population (Internet users), a mode of governance (self-regulation), and its own system of values ​​(transparency, opposition to a hierarchical system, etc.). This territorial representation of cyberspace is present in “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace”, published in 1996 by the late John Perry Barlow, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. This declaration defines cyberspace as a territory that is not under the sovereignty of States, thus establishing a new border between the geographical territory of States and cyberspace.

But in the early 2000s, politicians began to see a “borderless” cyberspace as an “out of control” space or a “lawless” zone. Unlike the pioneers, politicians use the phrase as criticism rather than praise because of the significant difficulties states face in enforcing their national laws in cyberspace and in exercising their national security prerogatives and defense. Indeed, the cross-border nature of cyberspace creates many challenges for authorities struggling to tackle the rise and proliferation of cyberattacks, cybercrime and hate speech online. The rapid pace of change in the digital world also calls into question the ability of states to envision, create and implement strategies or pass laws to respond to new technologies, capabilities and uses. Political speeches denouncing the “borderless” nature of cyberspace reveal that governments understand that they have lost part of their sovereignty and allude to their desire to project their borders into cyberspace.

Projection of state borders: entanglements and overlays

In the beginning, some states attempted to recreate their physical borders through network infrastructure. The best-known example is the Chinese “great firewall” of the 2000s; since its creation, this censorship system has evolved a lot and become more complex. Today, comparing it to a firewall would be insufficient to say the least, if not totally false. Yet the desire to erect digital borders that correspond to physical borders persists: more recently, at the end of 2019, Russia and Iran temporarily disconnected their national networks from the World Wide Web. These actions were presented as protection and defense actions in the event of cyber attacks deployed from abroad.

Efforts to project state borders into cyberspace also include state law enforcement in cyberspace. Indeed, states attempt to project their legal borders into cyberspace in order to exercise their normative and enforcement powers (the application of laws and regulations to events occurring mainly abroad). To this end, governments attempt to connect a cyber event to their territory by referring to the physical location of the information technology (IT) infrastructure (internet cables, servers, etc.), individuals or entities. on their territory. They also invoke the nationality of the legal or natural person linked to the cybernetic event as a connecting factor. Because each country tries to project its borders – and several countries are more likely to claim such a connection – competing jurisdictions sometimes take place around a single cyber event.

A peaceful coexistence of jurisdictions occurs in many cases, but certain situations can lead to friction. One of the most famous and well-documented examples of overlapping jurisdictions is the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD), a US law that requires every US company, including its subsidiaries, to disclose data hosted on their sites. servers, wherever they are in the world these servers can be located. This 2018 law has been the subject of much criticism, including in Europe, and continues to raise serious concerns to this day, due to its extraterritoriality. However, from a legal point of view, its illegality has not been fully proven, since the law is based on a link: the nationality of the company.

The ability of the CLOUD Act to go beyond the territorial character of infrastructure was also seen as a threat to the sovereignty of other states. Questions have been raised regarding the compatibility of the CLOUD Act with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) which protects the data of European Union (EU) citizens, including when the data is processed by non-European companies. . In some situations, this could lead to a de facto limited application of the GDPR for the benefit of the CLOUD Act. The projection of state borders in cyberspace, and the conflicts it can generate, show that the concept of borders in cyberspace remains relevant. Nonetheless, this projection raises many points of friction because of the tangled and intertwined claims to sovereignty it provokes – and thus adds new complexity to the notion of borders.

Geopolitical conflict and fluidity of digital borders

Beyond the static (physical infrastructure) and traditional (legal) projections of state borders in cyberspace, there is a new type of border specific to the functioning of networks, much more fluid and dynamic, with constant and rapid updates. . While networks can be reconfigured for technical reasons, they can also be adapted for geopolitical reasons. Controlling infrastructure and its protocols is indeed “at the heart of the major political and territorial issues”, according to an analysis of routing and the Border Gateway Protocol, one of the main protocols allowing the Internet to function.

Take Ukraine for example. Since 2014, Russian authorities and separatist forces have taken action to link the networks in Donbass and Crimea (and the traffic they generate) with that of Russia in order to create a “kind of ‘digital front line’. which reflects the military front line. The objective for Russia and the separatist forces is not only to control the network, but also to bring these territories under Russian influence. These actions are part of a broader political strategy of the Russian authorities to establish a “sovereign” Internet, like the temporary disconnections mentioned above.

Geopolitical conflicts can therefore shape the borders of cyberspace by modifying existing borders and creating new ones. Thus, the territorial dynamics of annexation or fragmentation also exist in cyberspace. Far from the utopian representation of a “borderless” world so desired by the Internet pioneers, cyberspace is indeed a ground of confrontation for States wishing to extend their legal borders or their spheres of influence. But a forecast of what might happen leads one to think of borders not only as fixed and static – physical borders have never been, for that matter – but as extremely fluid and dynamic constructions.

This article was originally published in French in Diplomat, no. 109 (May-June 2021).


Alix Desforges and Aude Géry are researchers at the Geopolitics of Datasphère (GEODE), a research and training center of the French Institute of Geopolitics (IFG) of the University of Paris 8.

Image: An Ethernet server is shown. Photo by REUTERS

]]>
Euro at 20 – OrissaPOST https://www.ameritas.co.uk/euro-at-20-orissapost/ Fri, 31 Dec 2021 02:00:21 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/euro-at-20-orissapost/ Jean Pisani-Ferry TA few years ago, on January 1, 2002, citizens of 12 European countries started using new euro banknotes and coins. A larger-than-life project – emblematic of a time when European leaders were bold enough to step into the unknown – has thus become a tangible reality. This flawless transition crowns a company imagined […]]]>

Jean Pisani-Ferry


TA few years ago, on January 1, 2002, citizens of 12 European countries started using new euro banknotes and coins. A larger-than-life project – emblematic of a time when European leaders were bold enough to step into the unknown – has thus become a tangible reality.

This flawless transition crowns a company imagined in the 1970s, conceived in the 1980s and negotiated in the 1990s. Expectations were high: supporters of the euro hoped that it would bring economic and financial integration, a convergence of policies, political fusion and global influence.
Two decades later, it’s hard to avoid being disappointed with economic integration. The first assessments of the trade impact of the single currency revealed that it barely exceeded 2%. Recent research from the European Central Bank puts the effect at perhaps 5%. It’s still small, and in itself not worth the effort. Two regions of Europe trade with each other on average six times less if they are not in the same country. Due to history, languages, networks, justice systems, and reluctance to unify regulations, national borders still matter considerably.

The history of financial services is more dramatic. In the early years, banks extended credit abroad, often recklessly, until the euro crisis ten years ago triggered a precipitous pullback behind national borders. Regulators, applying the famous aphorism that banks are global in life, but national in death, have told them to stop sharing liquidity with non-national subsidiaries. Fragmentation ensued.

The bold decision to launch a European banking union in June 2012 responded to this. But the implementation was only partial: while the banks of the euro zone are now supervised by the ECB, insolvency cases are found de facto in the hands of nationals. Financial integration has picked up somewhat, but momentum is weak.

Although pan-European banks are able to diversify risks on a larger scale, national governments remain reluctant to give up privileged relationships with “their” banking systems.

The convergence of policies towards the top performers was supposed to result from self-discipline, as well as fiscal policy rules and the creation of coordination processes. But, having given up the autonomy of monetary policy, many governments have rejected other demands of Brussels. For ten years, credit growth and inflation rates diverged, and few of them except then-ECB President Jean-Claude Trichet were very concerned. When the euro crisis finally erupted, it brought the northern and southern member countries of the EU into complete contradiction.

Convergence has since improved. Under constraint, the competitiveness gaps narrowed. The ECB helped quell speculation on leaving the euro zone, ensuring that borrowers in all member states have access to similarly priced credit. The response to the COVID-19 shock has been remarkably cooperative, with the support of the European Commission and the ECB. And the recovery program launched in the summer of 2020 broke long-standing taboos.
There is now a debate about how much further reform Europe’s macroeconomic policy system needs. Some argue that the current arrangements would work well if governments played by the rules. But as myself and a group of economists and lawyers argued recently, today’s changed environment means that political priorities cannot focus solely on promoting discipline in each. Member state.

Instead, high debt ratios, low interest rates, the likelihood of recurring turmoil, and age-old challenges like climate change call for the coordination of monetary and fiscal policies, reform of fiscal rules, and making arrangements to jointly cope with shocks. It is encouraging that Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi and French President Emmanuel Macron endorsed such reforms in a recent commentary.

Political agglomeration, a long-standing European objective, was to follow monetary union. Hans Tietmeyer, the late German central banker, liked to quote Nicolas Oresme, a medieval philosopher who said that money belongs to the community rather than to the prince. Supporters of the euro hoped, somewhat confusedly, that a common currency would create a sense of community.

It did not happen directly. During the 1991-92 negotiations on the Maastricht Treaty, governments were supposed to discuss political union alongside monetary union. But many countries, starting with France, have rejected federal plans. Citizens initially treated euro banknotes as a technicality and not as a sign of belonging. Moreover, the new Member States, mainly from Central and Eastern Europe, which joined the EU in the mid-2000s did not share the post-national ethics of the Union’s founding fathers. The euro crisis has confirmed that solidarity remains rare.

But the euro can still indirectly generate a sense of community. Although fear, not love, has so far prevented countries from leaving it, in some ways the result is the same. Far-right populist politicians such as Marine Le Pen in France and Matteo Salvini in Italy have toned down their criticism of the euro. No major politician wants to bet against this anymore.

The writer, principal researcher at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel and non-resident principal researcher at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, holds the Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa Chair at the European University Institute. © Project union.

]]>
Cryptocurrency taxes and regulations: this is what Argentina and the world are trying https://www.ameritas.co.uk/cryptocurrency-taxes-and-regulations-this-is-what-argentina-and-the-world-are-trying/ Sun, 26 Dec 2021 17:22:05 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/cryptocurrency-taxes-and-regulations-this-is-what-argentina-and-the-world-are-trying/ It’s been over a decade since Satoshi Nakamoto created the queen of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin. More than ten years in which more and more cryptocurrencies were appearing (there are thousands of them and it continues) in a market that lived on the fringes of the law until quite recently, when they started to enter into force […]]]>

It’s been over a decade since Satoshi Nakamoto created the queen of cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin. More than ten years in which more and more cryptocurrencies were appearing (there are thousands of them and it continues) in a market that lived on the fringes of the law until quite recently, when they started to enter into force laws that attempt to regulate these digital assets. And with a perspective, it is inevitable to wonder how this will affect the sector, if there will be more and more regulations and restrictions, or if the banks will increase the pressure on these currencies.

In Europe, regulation began in 2018 with the promulgation of the fifth European Union (EU) directive, which arrived on November 12, 2018.. A regulation approved by Parliament to strengthen the fight against money laundering included in the Directive on the prevention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism (AMLD), which introduced the regulation of the activity of service providers of cryptocurrency.

In theory, the member states of the European Union had until January 2020 to transpose the rule. Some countries – like Germany, France, Luxembourg and Portugal – are working on their own tax frameworks, although by 2022 the MiCA (Market in Crypto Assets) regulation is expected to progress.

However, its entry into force has been postponed to 2024 for the 27 members of the European Union. MiCA represents the big unified update of cryptocurrency regulation in the European Economic Area. “This regulation aims to become the heart of cryptocurrency regulation and provide legal certainty to the market, so that it is attractive to developers and investors as well as safe for users and consumers,” Viñals said. .

It is about establishing uniform and unique legislation for all member countries this would greatly simplify the regulation of that market. Since Coinmotion, they have emphasized that its implementation would mean two major advances: any regulated company could operate in complete freedom in the EU and the investor would see its protection reinforced.

Raúl López, country manager at Coinmotion, underlines that “this regulation is very ambitious, but necessary, because the development of new cryptocurrency-related products and services is progressing at breakneck speed, which demands that the legislation be adapted as quickly as possible so as not to be left behind and delay the revolutionary development of digital finance which would leave us at a distinct disadvantage compared to powerful countries like China and the United States. “

In the United States, there is nervousness about fear that a cryptocurrency threatens the dollar’s dominance in global finance. This means that there is a certain “fragmentation” in terms of regulation. So, as with most laws in this country, those related to cryptocurrencies vary from state to state, and federal authorities interpret and regulate them differently as well.

In the United States it’s even more complicated, like many states go it alone and each apply their regulations and guidelines, being in general quite restrictive and especially in those governed by the Democratic Party, although it is not that there are many Republicans with pro-crypto legislation. For this reason, and so that talent and innovation do not have to leave the United States, a movement is starting to take shape to create a new political party truly committed to technological innovation, with cryptocurrencies at its heart. spear, ”says Castro-Acuña. .

Recently, a few milestones have been seen such as the IPO of a cryptocurrency company (Coinbase on the Nasdaq) or the launch of the first cryptocurrency ETF (that of ProShares). However, the challenges of the cryptoasset industry are great to come.

Source of the article

Disclaimer: This article is generated from the feed and not edited by our team.

]]>
Designing a Numerical Order for a Fragmented Era https://www.ameritas.co.uk/designing-a-numerical-order-for-a-fragmented-era/ Thu, 23 Dec 2021 21:00:00 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/designing-a-numerical-order-for-a-fragmented-era/ A robot is pictured during Expo 2020 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on November 10. (Photo: AFP) Although the digital revolution is now decades old, there is still no global digital economic order. Instead, there are competing visions of digital capitalism, mainly articulated by the United States, China and the European Union, which have been […]]]>

A robot is pictured during Expo 2020 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates on November 10. (Photo: AFP)

Although the digital revolution is now decades old, there is still no global digital economic order. Instead, there are competing visions of digital capitalism, mainly articulated by the United States, China and the European Union, which have been developing their models for many years and increasingly exporting them to developing economies. and emerging. Without more global alignment, the world could miss out on promising technological solutions to common problems.

The question, of course, is what kind of alternate numerical order is possible in today’s world. How to reclaim the Internet to serve citizens rather than dominant political and economic interests? Realigning the incentives that drive the digital economy will not be easy. Yet recent policy development efforts reflect the demand for new forms of governance.

The OECD, for example, is leading an effort to combat international tax arbitration – a preferred practice among large US tech companies. At the same time, US President Joe Biden has appointed industry critics to head key institutions such as the Federal Trade Commission, and he has called on regulators to investigate the issue of excessive platform power. in digital markets.

Likewise, the Chinese government has introduced a new law on the protection of personal information and is chairing a major national antitrust campaign to control the explosion of the country’s digital market. And the European Union, building on its General Data Protection Regulation, has advanced a broader, ethically driven vision to govern data, digital markets and artificial intelligence. Additionally, countries like Spain and Germany are now directly targeting the data mining business model.

Regulators and government authorities around the world are considering how to redefine their AI and data agendas, nurture the next generation of digital players, and shape global standards to match their own respective visions. But if the primary goal of each of these jurisdictions is to harness overpowered digital platforms, there may be common ground on which to build a more effective global digital order.

The digital authorities in the EU and the US certainly don’t agree on everything. But they share a vision of a more open and collaborative digital order. If they are to effectively align with this overarching goal, they must understand what they are facing. Divergent views on the fundamental structure of the global Internet have already taken hold.

In the emerging “splinternet”, informational isolation is on the rise. People in different silos have fundamentally different views on the facts and therefore on what constitutes truth. There isn’t even an agreement on how to secure and coordinate key elements of digital architecture, such as GPS. Each jurisdiction has its own framework, whether it is China’s BeiDou satellite navigation system, India’s regional satellite navigation system, or the European Galileo system.

This fragmentation of the governance of digital and information power has been accompanied by a rise in illiberalism, with many countries exerting greater social control and exploring new avenues for the dissemination of propaganda. The cost of experimenting with new modes of digital authoritarianism has fallen sharply because the basic tools are widely available and easy to use.

Platforms like Facebook have effectively subsidized the cost – unwittingly, but not necessarily unknowingly – of running large-scale disinformation campaigns. Building the technology stack (software infrastructure) needed to create a totalitarian system of surveillance and social control is now as easy as putting together the right applications.

The digital order that has emerged in the absence of global coordination raises two major concerns. The first is the digital side of big global challenges like climate change and pandemics, which exist independently of liberal or illiberal governments. Just as the effects of climate change will be felt unevenly, the technologies needed to adapt and mitigate climate change – or monitor epidemics – will be unevenly distributed.

The second problem is the incompatibility of competing visions of future digital economies. Many developing and emerging economies are still deciding how to expand and manage their digital capabilities so that new technologies serve their broader strategies for achieving sustained economic growth. These two concerns must be addressed together. If measures to improve access to technology do not take into account different local and national growth strategies, they can entrench an unwanted digital economic future, even if they promise progress against other issues such as climate change. .

Addressing these concerns together is directly linked to the pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030. Whether it is public health, education or climate change, the search for global alignment should be a priority. top priority for any country rather than securing narrow geopolitical gains. But, of course, realists must recognize that the current competition between models of data control, hardware design, and platform governance will feature prominently in any multilateral negotiation on these issues.

In view of this, each of the three digital powers can come to the table with their eyes open. Creating a more stable and cohesive global digital order does not need to be a matter of complete alignment between the three models. But not thinking about how and where these digital controls are incompatible can lead to a race to the bottom rather than a race to the top. What matters in the short term is that there is some degree of interoperability in areas that touch on global challenges.

After two years of living with Covid-19, all major powers and regions should recognize the importance of freely sharing certain types of data. They should now start to identify other commonalities. A new and better numerical order is possible, but it will not happen on its own.© 2021 Project union


]]>
European Commission adopts binding nine-month acceptance period for COVID19 vaccination certificates https://www.ameritas.co.uk/european-commission-adopts-binding-nine-month-acceptance-period-for-covid19-vaccination-certificates/ Tue, 21 Dec 2021 23:48:06 +0000 https://www.ameritas.co.uk/european-commission-adopts-binding-nine-month-acceptance-period-for-covid19-vaccination-certificates/ The European Commission has adopted rules on the EU’s COVID digital certificate, establishing a binding acceptance period of 9 months (more precisely 270 days) vaccination certificates for intra-EU travel. A clear and uniform acceptance period for vaccination certificates will ensure that travel measures continue to be coordinated, as requested by the European Council following its […]]]>

The European Commission has adopted rules on the EU’s COVID digital certificate, establishing a binding acceptance period of 9 months (more precisely 270 days) vaccination certificates for intra-EU travel.

A clear and uniform acceptance period for vaccination certificates will ensure that travel measures continue to be coordinated, as requested by the European Council following its last meeting on December 16, 2021. The new rules will ensure that the restrictions are based on the best scientific evidence available, as well as objective criteria. Continuous coordination is essential for the functioning of the single market and it will allow EU citizens to exercise their right to free movement more clearly.

The certificate continues to make it easier for citizens to travel safely across the European Union in these times of a pandemic. Until now, 807 million certificates were issued in the EU. The EU’s COVID digital certificate has set a global standard: to date, 60 countries and territories from five continents have joined the system.

The new rules for intra-EU travel harmonize the different rules between member states. This validity period takes into account the guidelines of the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control, according to which booster doses are recommended no later than six months after the end of the first cycle of vaccination. The certificate will remain valid for an additional three-month grace period beyond those six months to ensure that national immunization campaigns can adapt and citizens have access to booster doses.

The new rules on the period of acceptance of vaccination certificates apply for travel purposes. When introducing different rules for the use of certificates at national level, Member States are encouraged to align them with these new rules in order to ensure the safety of travelers and reduce disruption.

In addition, today the Commission has also adapted the encoding rules vaccination certificates. This is necessary to ensure that vaccination certificates indicating completion of the primary series can always be distinguished from vaccination certificates issued after a booster dose.

Boosters will be saved as follows:

  • 3/3 for a booster dose after a 2-dose primary vaccination.
  • 2/1 for a booster dose after a single dose vaccination or a dose of a 2 dose vaccine given to a recovered person.

Stella Kyriakides, Commissioner for Health and Food Safety, said: “A harmonized validity period for the EU digital COVID certificate is a necessity for safe free movement and coordination at EU level. The strength and success of this invaluable tool for citizens and businesses lies in its consistent use across the EU. What is needed now is to ensure that the recall campaigns run as quickly as possible, that as many citizens as possible are protected by an extra dose and that our certificates remain a key tool for travel and security. protection of public health.

Didier Reynders, Commissioner for Justice, said: “The EU’s digital COVID certificate is a success. We must continue to do so and adapt to changing circumstances and new knowledge. Unilateral action in Member States would bring us back to the fragmentation and uncertainties we experienced last spring. The nine-month acceptance deadline for vaccination certificates will give citizens and businesses the certainty they need to plan their trips with confidence. It is now up to Member States to ensure that boosters are deployed quickly to protect our health and ensure safe travel. ”

Internal Market Commissioner, Thierry Breton, noted: “The EU Digital COVID certificate has become a global standard. By reflecting the latest scientific knowledge on boosters, the certificate remains an essential tool to fight against the different waves of the pandemic. Along with the large-scale production and supply of vaccines, the certificate will help member states speed up the roll-out of booster shots – a necessity to protect public health, while preserving the free movement of our citizens. “

Follow EU Today on social media:

European Commission

European Commission Press Service, Brussels.


]]>