Evaluating Fiscal Policy Changes

🌍 We Can’t Afford to Get Climate Policy Wrong—A Look at the Data Behind What Really Works 🌍 In the race against time to combat climate change, bold promises are everywhere. But here’s the critical question: Are the policies being implemented actually reducing emissions at the scale we need? A groundbreaking study published in Science, cuts through the noise and delivers the insights we desperately need. Evaluating 1,500 climate policies from around the world, the research identifies the 63 most effective ones—policies that have delivered tangible, significant reductions in emissions. What’s striking is that the most successful strategies often involve combinations of policies, rather than single initiatives. Think of it as the ultimate teamwork: when policies like carbon pricing, renewable energy mandates, and efficiency standards are combined thoughtfully, the impact is far greater than any one policy could achieve on its own. It’s a powerful reminder that for climate solutions the whole is indeed greater than the sum of its parts. Moreover, the study’s use of counterfactual emissions pathways is a game changer. By showing what would have happened without these policies, it provides a clear, quantifiable measure of their effectiveness. This is exactly the kind of rigorous evaluation we need to ensure that every policy counts, especially when we’re working against the clock. If we’re serious about meeting the Paris Agreement’s targets, we need to focus on what works—and this research offers a clear roadmap. Let’s champion policies that have proven to make a difference, because we don’t have time to waste on anything less. 🔗 Full study in the comments #ClimateAction #Sustainability #PolicyEffectiveness #ParisAgreement #NetZero #ClimateScience

The Budget dropped day before and I figured I’d do a quick rundown of what it actually means if you’re a woman in India. Yes a lot of this applies to men but I haven’t seen a women specific breakdown yet so this is mine- Your salary: Tax slabs haven’t changed from last year. If you’re earning up to ₹12 lakh (₹12.75 lakh if you’re salaried), you’re still paying zero income tax. No new relief this round, but nothing’s been taken away either. If you or your kid is studying abroad, there’s a small win- the TCS on education remittances dropped from 5% to 2%. Starting something of your own: This is where most of the new stuff is. The government announced a “She-Mark” which is basically a verified badge for women entrepreneurs that’s supposed to make it easier to access bank credit and formal financing. The pitch is that instead of just giving you a subsidy, they’re giving you a credential that tells banks “take her seriously.” It’s an interesting idea. Whether banks actually behave differently because of a badge, we’ll see. There’s also “SHE MARTs” which are community-owned retail outlets for women in self-help groups to sell their products with real branding and distribution support, not just a local mela setup. And the Lakhpati Didi programme got extended, with the government now saying the goal isn’t just “help women earn” but “help women own businesses.” That language shift matters, even if the gap between announcement and implementation is where most schemes go to die lol. Education: One girls’ hostel per district across the country. That’s 700+ hostels, specifically meant for women in STEM. I’ve seen a few people scoffing at it but lack of safe accommodation is #1 reason women don’t go for higher education. Safe, affordable housing near institutions could genuinely help! The big picture number: The Gender Budget is now 9.37% of the total budget (up from 8.86% last year) totalling about ₹5 lakh crore. More ministries are reporting gender-linked spending than ever. Numbers look good on paper. What’s not here: No new tax breaks for women specifically. The ₹2 crore loan scheme for first-time women entrepreneurs from last year’s budget is ‘still being rolled out’ and nothing new added. And the Matru Vandana Yojana still gives ₹6,000 per mother, unchanged since 2013. Twelve years of inflation later, that number looks almost quaint. The overall vibe is more “we want women to be entrepreneurs” and less “we want to protect women.” Whether that’s a genuine structural shift or just better speechwriting is going to depend entirely on execution. But at least the conversation has moved from welfare to ownership, and that’s something to note.

€800 billion a year. That's the price tag Mario Draghi says Europe must meet to stay competitive with the US and China. As an investor and sustainability entrepreneur, reading the Future of European Competitiveness report was eye-opening. It's clear that Europe has to close the innovation gap and invest boldly in clean energy and digitalisation, but this is only part of the challenge. Draghi emphasises that radical change is necessary to prevent the EU from becoming less competitive on the global stage. Here are a few key points from the report that resonate with me, both positively and with concerns: 👉🏻Scaling EU Companies: Draghi highlights that Europe is failing to scale its companies, which limits our global competitiveness. We have incredible innovation happening here, but the lack of support to take these companies to the next level is a major issue. 👉🏻Investment in R&D: The report points to underinvestment in research and development. If we want to remain at the forefront of sectors like clean tech and mobility, we need much more capital flowing into R&D, especially in emerging technologies like AI and renewables. 👉🏻Venture Capital: Draghi's report underscores the urgent need for more venture capital across Europe, a core message I strongly support. We need greater acceptance of venture capital as an asset class, especially in Germany, where the market remains risk-averse. This lack of funding pushes our most innovative companies to scale up elsewhere, particularly in the US. Europe needs to step up to provide the environment needed for startups to thrive and grow right here at home. 👉🏻Common Debt: The idea of joint EU borrowing for green and digital projects is essential to remain competitive, especially in areas like clean tech and mobility. This is a necessary step to unleash the full potential of the sector. 👉🏻The China Challenge: Europe's reliance on China, particularly in clean tech, needs to be rethought. I've seen firsthand how fierce the competition is in the electric vehicle space. While Draghi stresses reducing dependencies, I do think we must be cautious of the economic disruptions a rapid decoupling could cause. 👉🏻Streamlining Policy: Entrepreneurs are struggling with the slow pace of European decision-making, especially in green tech. We risk losing our competitive edge if we don't accelerate policy change. Europe has an incredible opportunity, but it requires bold action. Do you think Europe is ready to rise to the challenge, or will bureaucracy stand in the way? Let's discuss in the comments... #Draghi #Innovation #Sustainability #CleanEnergy #VentureCapital #Investment

Mario Draghi's analysis of the future of European competitiveness highlights the changes that I have long considered necessary and urgent. Draghi points out that the telecom sector is overcrowded: "Today, the EU has dozens of telecom players serving around 450 million consumers, compared with a handful in the US and China, respectively," and adds, "as a result, in Europe both revenues per subscriber and capital expenditure per capita (...) are less than half the US’ and Japan’s levels," reaching the conclusion that "the declining profitability of the telecom sector now may represent a risk for industrial companies in Europe." There couldn’t be a more authoritative confirmation of the perfect storm I also described on stage at the GSMA Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in 2023 (https://lnkd.in/dfi5yQss). That’s where I showed how it was necessary and urgent to change the rules of the game, because #InactionIsNotAnOption. Some may have thought I was being provocative, but step by step, we are all converging on the same positions. First, there was the report "Much More than a Market" by Enrico Letta and Jacques Delors Institute, then the White Paper by the European Commission with Thierry Breton "How to master Europe’s digital infrastructure needs?". Now, Mario Draghi's perspective joins them, recommending to "reform the EU’s regulation and competition stance to complete the digital single market for telecommunications, harmonizing rules and favoring cross-border mergers and operations," and he adds in more detail: • "reduce country-level ex ante regulation and favor rather ex post competition enforcement • facilitate cross-border integration and the creation of EU-wide players • introduce a ‘same rules for same services’ principle across the EU • encourage the definition of commercial contractual agreements for terminating data traffic and infrastructure cost-sharing • incentivize the deployment of new infrastructures by defining cut-off dates for older technologies". Well, let’s continue down this path, united as we are already doing, thanks to the work of organizations such as the Confindustria team led by Emanuele Orsini, GSMA, and Connect Europe, with the indispensable contribution of the Ministero delle Imprese e del Made in Italy by Adolfo Urso, Alessio Butti, Agcom, and AGCM. We are ready to do our part, aware that the game we are playing is one of the most important: without #TLC, there is no digitalization. Report “The future of European Competitiveness”: https://lnkd.in/dhb875VR

As anyone following EU affairs could not avoid notice, Mario Draghi unveiled his long-awaited report today. He touched upon various issues, but digital technologies in general and AI in particular stand out as a make-it-or-break-it matter. Here is what you need to know. The report's focus is on Europe's competitiveness. For Draghi, the origin of the productivity gap between the EU and the US that started to widen in the mid-1990s is explained mainly by Europe's failure to capitalize on the first digital revolution driven by the internet. Several structural problems are pointed out, particularly those related to access to capital and fragmentation of the single market. However, the most daunting criticism for Brussels is "inconsistent and restrictive regulations" that burden SMEs and innovators. Draghi notes that "while the ambitions of the EU's GDPR and AI Act are commendable, their complexity and risk of overlaps and inconsistencies can undermine developments in the field of AI by EU industry actors." A slap in the face for EU policymakers who boast the 'Brussels effect.' Very harsh words at the press conference as well. "With this legislation, we are killing our companies," Draghi said, pointing out that regulation favors large players since SMEs have fewer resources for compliance. To mitigate this regulatory burden, Draghi suggests harmonizing national AI sandbox regimes, simplifying the implementation of the GDPR, and avoiding contradictions between the two landmark laws. Potential regulatory hindrances should also be regularly assessed. The report recommends the adoption of an EU Cloud and AI Development Act to enhance computing infrastructure and AI capabilities and launch plans to integrate AI models in strategic sectors vertically. Draghi details how he thinks these verticals should be developed, as he sees them as vital for Europe's industrial players to stay competitive. The overall coordination is assigned to a 'CERN-like' AI incubator, an idea that emerged from the EU chief scientific advisors. The report goes one step further and proposes the launch of 'quasi-pilot lines' to bring together the relevant market actors to develop sector-specific AI models. Grand challenges are also envisaged to fast-track translating scientific findings into industrial applications. To sum up, for Draghi, Europe needs to get back into the tech race with the US and China, and the 'AI revolution' is a key opportunity that should not be missed. "A window has opened for Europe to redress its failings in innovation and productivity and to restore its manufacturing potential."

Two new Budget policies could finally challenge the one rule every Indian woman knows:  “Be back before dark.” When I heard the announcement, something in me softened… and strengthened. Because for once, a policy didn’t feel like governance. It felt personal. This year, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced a girls’ hostel in every district and community-owned She-MARTS to support women entrepreneurs. I grew up studying in different corners of the country, cities, small towns, districts where the nearest college was miles away. And everywhere, the same rules quietly followed us: “Be home before dark.” “Don’t stay back after class.” “Don’t travel alone.” They were boundaries drawn by lack of safety. So when I hear “a girls’ hostel in every district,” I hear freedom, freedom to choose a better college, stay back late, travel, participate, and simply exist without fear. Freedom for parents to say yes. And then there’s work, the space where women constantly negotiate visibility and opportunity. Running a business today, I know how real those barriers are. That’s why She MARTS matter. They’re women-led, community-owned marketplaces that offer retail space, digital visibility, training, and credit linkages to women. For women in remote regions, a She MART means: You don’t need to leave your village to run a business. Your products don’t stay hidden. You don’t stay invisible. This budget finally acknowledges the everyday barriers we’ve normalised for generations. And when a country gives its women a safe place to study and a platform to grow, it doesn’t just uplift women. It uplifts generations.

So, what is actually in Union Budget 2026 for women? Not token mentions or just one-off schemes. But 'real' systems that make participation easier, safer, and more sustainable. The shift from 'Lakhpati didis' to SHE-Marts was deeply functional. Moving women from credit-based livelihoods to ownership of community retail. From earning to enterprise. From dependence to control over outcomes. Then there’s a girls’ hostel for STEM in every district. Safety and access aren’t framed as social issues here, but as economic ones. You can’t talk about women in science without solving where they live. The idea of university townships near industrial corridors matters for young women more than we admit. Education, skilling, jobs, and housing in one ecosystem. Fewer drop-offs. Fewer trade-offs. Add to this AVGC labs, design institutions, and structured creative pathways, where many young women already lead. The Budget doesn’t invent new aspirations but is strengthening existing ones. And finally, the care economy. Large-scale, formal training for caregivers in health, wellness, and assistive services. Work that women already do, now recognised, skilled, and employable. What stood out for me is the tone. Women aren’t positioned as beneficiaries of growth. They’re positioned as contributors to it. That’s a meaningful shift. #Budget2026 #Women #India

India saved $17B on Russian oil. It is now projected to lose $37B to Trump’s tariffs. But it is not the same India on both sides of this story. A new report by the Global Trade Research Initiative estimates that while cheaper Russian crude lowered India’s oil import bill since 2022, higher US tariffs could wipe out more than twice those gains by dragging down exports by over 40 percent. But what the report does not show is who gained and who is now losing. ➡️Who gained • The big refiners like Reliance, IOCL and BPCL bought discounted Russian crude, exported refined products at global prices, and saw margins swell. • The government collected tens of thousands of crores through windfall taxes. ➡️Who is losing • Export sectors such as textiles, gems and jewellery are under pressure. • These industries are dominated by SMEs, which employ over 110 million Indians and contribute nearly 40 percent of exports. They have very little buffer to absorb the shock. So the benefits went upward to the giants while the pain is projected to fall on the smallest players. The winners of Russian oil are not the losers of US tariffs. And that is India’s real dilemma.

Russia halted crude exports from April 1: A quick scenario Russia supplies about 30-40% of the crude oil India uses. If this supply were to suddenly stop, it would create a major problem for India, leading to a sharp rise in import costs. Experts believe that finding alternative oil sources could cost India about ₹85,000 crores per year. Additionally, for every $1 increase in oil prices per barrel, India would incur an additional ₹15,000 crores in annual expenses. This could strain India’s economy and weaken the value of the Indian rupee. The rising cost of replacement barrels will lead to higher fuel bills, potentially increasing inflation and putting more pressure on the Indian rupee (INR). India has about 74 days of oil storage capacity, which includes both commercial reserves and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Out of this, the SPR can cover around 9.5 days of the country’s oil needs. To secure its energy supply, India has diversified and now sources oil from over 40 suppliers. There is a noticeable shift towards importing more oil from countries like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and the US. The halt in Russian oil supply means that refineries that usually handle Russian Urals crude will need to adjust their operations quickly, which might also raise shipping costs because the oil will have to come from farther away. Overall, this is not a prediction of what will happen, but rather a way to assess the system's resilience. The important factors to watch are not just how much oil is available, but also the prices, transportation costs, and how quickly refineries can change their setups. #EnergySecurity #OilAndGas #India #Geopolitics #SupplyChains

Russia’s Oil Money Is Drying Up—Here’s What That Means for the Country. On August 5, the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation reported that oil and gas revenues in the country declined sharply for the third consecutive month in July, primarily due to lower oil prices and a stronger ruble. In July, the government collected RUB787.3 billion ($9.84 billion) in oil and gas profit taxes, a 28% decrease compared to last year. Total #oil and #gas revenues decreased by 19% year-on-year to RUB5.52 trillion ($69 billion) in the first seven months of 2025. Gas revenues fell by more than half, dropping 53% to just RUB51.1 billion ($639 million), as Gazprom’s exports to #Europe reached their lowest level since the early 1970s.1970s [https://lnkd.in/eBnSuUxa]. Due to these and other factors, #Russia's federal budget deficit in the first half of 2025 amounted to 3.7 trillion rubles ($46.25 billion). This ongoing trend seriously challenges Russia’s fiscal stability and economic strategy. Several factors contribute to this decline. Global energy markets remain unstable, influenced by shifts in supply and demand, sanctions, and geopolitical tensions. Reduced demand from major trade partners and fluctuations in international oil prices threaten Russia’s hydrocarbon export income. Additionally, regional production limits and the global economy's shift toward renewable energy and decarbonization are reshaping long-term revenue outlooks. This situation has broader economic and strategic implications in the short and long term. In the short term, Russia may face greater difficulty financing its military efforts in #Ukraine and might need to consider compromises to freeze or settle hostilities. Over the longer term, Russia’s reliance on #hydrocarbon revenues has constrained its economic diversification. A sustained decline in oil and gas income could spark debates on economic restructuring, innovation, and investments outside the energy sector. At the same time, it may lead to stronger financial and trade ties with nations less affected by sanctions or geopolitical tensions, shaping Russia’s future global economic position. The projected decline in Russia’s oil and gas revenues is more than a fiscal statistic—it is a strategic alarm. Reliance on hydrocarbons has long funded not only domestic spending but also Russia’s military ambitions, including the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Shrinking revenue underscores the urgent need for economic diversification and fiscal prudence. How the government responds, through budgetary adjustments, new revenue streams, or financial reallocation, will shape domestic stability and the capacity to sustain costly military operations. In this sense, the next few months will be decisive. They will reveal whether Russia can adapt to a tightening fiscal environment or face mounting economic and strategic vulnerabilities.