​​
2) International Monetary Architecture and the future of currencies

​
The global financial architecture maintained its structural fundaments since the 1970s after the gold-dollar system used from 1944 to 1971 collapsed. Then came the rise of floating exchange rates and the world paper dollar standard from 1971 to the present—associated with regular booms, panics, and busts—bringing us down to this very day. Just as in the early 1970s, the U.S. is unabashedly following an easy-money policy at home printing money without considering the international currency system. But as the Dollar is still the main currency in this system, those policies are highly criticized by other countries. Experts are already discussing about the possibility of a post-Dollar monetary system. Additionally, the Eurozone is struggling with fundamental problems of its own financial and currency system. Fiscal and monetary policies are still not synchronized despite having the same currency. The global economy has experienced slow growth since the U.S. financial crisis of 2008-2009, which has exposed these unsustainable policies, especially in countries like Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy, and Spain. Having, to varying degrees, failed to generate enough economic growth and implement structural reforms to pay back their debts, the slowdown of these economies brings all other European countries down. While the possibility of a default or an exit of one of the Eurozone countries is much lower now than it was early in 2011, the fundamental problem in the region (high government debt) remains in place. Giving these evolutions, how can the international monetary system be stabilized? Is a return to the gold-standard viable, does the Dollar need a different policy or lies the solution in a basket of various currencies? And where is the role of Europe in this possible new system?​
1) Fair-Trade and Trade Barriers

Driven in part by a progressive lowering of barriers to trade in both rich and developing countries, global trade expanded fast in the last decades. Economists argue that free trade makes everyone better off, allowing more varied goods, and lower prices, than would otherwise be possible. Some also argue that it leads to faster economic growth and less poverty. However, other critics of free trade argue that its supposed benefits for poor people and developing countries are illusory as the Trade benefits rich countries at the expense of poor ones, increasing inequality between nations. Others say that it hurts rich-country workers, particularly the less skilled, thus increasing economic equality within rich countries. All would rather that the world concentrate its efforts on making trade "fairer" rather than further attempt to reduce trade barriers. Giving these views, in which direction should the world leading economies conduct their trade and financial policies? And how should the leading economies deal with rising protectionism around the globe, considering that protectionism was one of the causes for the escalation of the global crisis in 1929?
3) Regulation of the International Finance and Banking System
​

Giving the rise of interconnectivity of the world and especially the financial and banking business, made possible by rapid improvement of technologies and a more open market, it’s widely accepted that this open and unregulated market was one of the main reasons for the global effects of the US-Subprime crisis. While some economists believe that higher internal risk management, incentives and self-control can prevent those crises, tendency is that the banking system should be more regulated and controlled by the states or by existing organizations like the IMF. Giving that there is also an organ for trade (the WTO), similar organizations for financial transactions could be created, but would give limits to the actual financial market, affecting especially the economies depending on these financial transactions. Influences of the financial sector have until nowadays prevented the introduction of mechanisms like the Tobin-Tax but with the EU planning on introducing such a tax, these influences could lose its importance. But will these mechanisms prevent more financial crisis like in the 1990s and in 2008? Are there other possibilities to stop the negative consequences of the global finance system? And how can those measures be applied without or with low negative impact on some members of the G20?
