The "Year of the Euro" conference held over the weekend in McKenna Hall assembled a variety of prominent historians, economists, sociologists and political scientists from both American and foreign universities to evaluate the effects of the single currency adopted in twelve European countries. The interdisciplinary forum was sponsored by the Nanovic Institute for European Studies and featured various opinions regarding the Euro's past, present and future effects on both economic and non-economic issues.

Eight academic sessions including, "The Euro and Transnational Migration: Managing the Politics of Change" and "Public Opinion and Political Discourse," each featured one chairperson and two to three participants who presented papers meant to analyze their respective topics.

The session entitled "The Euro as a Catalyst of Economic Change" featured three Notre Dame economics professors Jaime Ros and Teresa Ghilarducci as chair and discussant, respectively, and political science professor Layna Mosley as presenter. University of Oklahoma political science professor Mitchell Smith rounded out the panel as the second presenter.

In her paper "New Currency, New Constraints? The Euro and Financial Market-Government Relationships" and subsequent presentation, Mosley analyzed the effects that the single currency has taken on the relationships between financial markets, resident investors and European governments.

"The EMU [European Monetary Union] presents an additional restriction on physical autonomy," said Mosley. "It changes how governments can interact with financial markets."

Mosley described the economic differences between countries pre-EMU and post-EMU, including the decline of resident investment, the elimination of currency risk, and the prominence of default risk. Furthermore, whereas countries displayed wide varieties in interest-rate payouts before the new currency, the adoption of the Euro has created interest-rate convergence and near parity, said Mosley. Her description of these and other macro-economic considerations led into a brief discussion of the implications the currency will have on the future of the contemporary European welfare state.

"EMU marks a breaking point in government financial-market relations," Mosley said. "The ultimate impact of the EMU remains to be seen."

Ghilarducci's analysis of both papers focused on the influence of institutional investors and money managers with respect to the European Union as well as the aging of Europe and how these demographics will affect asset values in pension plans. She suggested that further exploration of these topics could enhance each work.

"My concern is how EU integration will affect so called best practices on corporate governance especially in the context of a rise in pension funds and the power of money managers," she said.

Another lecture session, "The Euro and Politics," chaired by history professor Doris Bergen, explored the relationship between the Euro currency and European governance. Panelists included political science professors Raimo Vayrynen as presenter and Daniel Philpott as discussant. Brandeis University professor of labor and social thought George Ross also served as a presenter.

Ross' paper "Euros, Europeans, and Institutions: Threats to the European Model of Society from EMU and Institutional Change" and presentation discussed how the monetary integration has affected European social policy. He offered his analysis that the idea of a single currency was launched nearly 30 years ago by France to restrict Germany's hold over the European economy.

"Monetary institution is a process," Ross said. "The Euro is basically a process of changing the macro-economic paradigm of Europe. This was a product of different interests over time [and] it was not inevitable."

Vayrynen's paper "The Politics of the Euro: Intra-European and Trans-Atlantic Aspects" focused on the currency's effect on European institutions and inter-governmental bodies. He also assessed the debate between Europeans and skeptical Americans with respect to the Euro's future.

"The basic argument by American economists is that the EMU is bound to fail," Vayrynen said. "There is a kind of trans-Atlantic stalemate because neither side is satisfied but almost any other agreement would be riskier."

Philpott praised both works but also posed questions for further investigation and consideration.

"The great strength [in Ross' paper] is its comprehensiveness," he said. "Some scholars may want more in the area of causal generalizations. Little is said here about globalization that some scholars say leads to economic integration."

The presented papers may soon be organized into a collected volume of works that will record the ideas and arguments put forth by the conference's participants said who said.

• Beer prices worry students
  
• Conference examines Euro