top of page
3.jpeg

Francesca Vinci

 

Economist

EU Institutions and Fora 

DG International and European Relations 

European Central Bank

PhD Economics 

Completed at the University of Nottingham 

 

Research Interests
Macroeconomics, EU Affairs, Fiscal Policy, Energy, Firm's Investment and Innovation, Growth Theory, International Economics, Monetary Economics



Passionate about
Connecting dots 
Expanding my comfort zone 
Teamwork


​​Email:

Francesca_Romana.Vinci@ecb.europa.eu

  • White LinkedIn Icon

© Thibaud Poirier 2019

EXPERIENCE
CURRICULUM VITAE

Full CV

Education

University of Nottingham

2016-2020 PhD Economics 

2014-2015 MSc Economics (Distinction) 

University of Rome Tor Vergata

2011-2014 BA Economics (110/110 Summa cum laude)

Experience

European Central Bank

September 2022 - today  Economist

September 2020 - August 2022  Graduate Programme Participant

 

Bank of England

June - August 2020 PhD Intern  

University of Nottingham

2019-2020 Graduate Teaching Fellow  

2017-2019 Graduate Teaching Assistant

 

Canalys (UK)

2015-2016 Research Analyst, Cyber Security Division

References

Professor Omar Licandro 

Univeristy of Nottingham

omar.licandro@nottingham.ac.uk

Professor Giammario Impullitti

Univeristy of Nottingham

giammario.impullitti@nottingham.ac.uk

RESEARCH
RESEARCH

Working papers

Switching-track after the Great Recession

(Joint with Omar Licandro)
Centre for Finance, Credit and Macroeconomics (CFCM)
20/02 Working Paper | 2020
Barcelona GSE Working Paper: 1260 | May 2021
CESifo Working Paper No. 9107 | May 2021
SUERF Policy Brief, No 244 |  December 2021
ECB Working paper No 2596 | October 2021
Latest Version 
Online Appendix
paperzoom - Copy.jpg

We propose a theoretical framework to reconcile episodes of V-shaped and L-shaped recovery, encompassing the behaviour of the U.S. economy before and after the Great Recession. In a DSGE model with endogenous growth, negative demand shocks destroy productive capacity, moving GDP to a lower trajectory. A Taylor rule policy designed to reduce the output gap may counterbalance the shocks, preventing the destruction of economic capacity and inducing a V-shaped recovery. However, when shocks are deep and persistent enough, like during the Great Recession, they call for a downward revision of potential output measures, the so-called switching-track, weakening the recovering role of monetary policy and inducing an L-shaped recovery. When calibrated to the U.S. economy, the model replicates well the L-shaped recovery and switching-track that followed the Great Recession, as well as the V-shaped recoveries that followed the oil shock recessions.

Potential Output, the Taylor Rule and the Fed

(Joint with Omar Licandro)
Centre for Finance, Credit and Macroeconomics (CFCM)
21/03 Working Paper
Latest Version 

The Taylor Rule is widely considered a useful tool to summarise the Fed's policy, but the information set employed in practice to assess the state of economic activity is still an object of debate. The contribution of this paper is to provide evidence in favour of the following hypotheses. First, the original Taylor Rule is a valid representation of the actual working of the Fed's monetary policy. Second, the real time beliefs of the Fed concerning potential output can be proxied by the estimates published by the Congressional Budget Office. Third, potential output estimates were revised down following the Great Recession.

Marrying Fiscal Rules and Investment: a Central Fiscal Capacity for Europe

(Joint with Christopher Schang)
ECB Workign Paper No 2962 | 2024
Latest Version 

The European fiscal governance framework remains incomplete, leading to challenges in coordinating policy responses when facing economic shocks, and hampering the transmission of the single monetary policy. Moreover, high public debt burdens, coupled with pro-cyclical and chronically low public investment in the face of high investment needs hamper resilience across Member States. Several policy-makers, institutions and academics hence share the view that the establishment of a central fiscal capacity (CFC) would be an important step forward. Against this backdrop, we provide a framework to assess a proposal for a CFC in the euro area, aimed at stabilizing the business cycle, promoting sovereign debt sustainability as well as reducing the procyclicality of public investment. We develop a two-region DSGE model with a permanent CFC that allocates resources based on the relative output gap of the two regions while earmarking a fraction for public investment and imposing fiscal adjustment requirements for the high-debt region. We find that the introduction of the CFC can lead to enhanced business cycle stabilisation and welfare improvements for both regions. In response to an asymmetric shock, the CFC reduces procyclicality in public investment and tames the public debt burden. The analysis also explores modelling extensions to enable European bond issuance and implement an active supranational investment strategy to address investment needs by providing European Public Goods (EPGs).

Burn now or never? Climate change exposure and investment of fossil fuel firms

(Joint with Jakob Feveile Adolfsen, Malte Heissel and Ana-Simona Manu)
ECB Workign Paper No 2945 | 2024
R&R at Journal of International Economics

 

Latest Version 

We investigate the impact of expectations about future climate policy on investment decisions of fossil fuel firms. Our empirical analysis reveals that firms with greater exposure to climate change significantly increased their investment in response to the Paris Agreement, in contrast to firms with lower exposure. Importantly, investment was directed towards traditional activities in the fossil fuel industry. By contrast, there are no indications that f irms invested to transition towards renewable energy sources nor in making production less carbon-intensive. Our findings contribute to the ongoing discussion about the potential adverse effects of delays in the implementation of climate regulation.

Intangible Intensity, Recessions and Growth Potential in Europe

Latest Version 

This paper analyses the evolution of intangible intensity in Europe, in normal times and following a negative shock. I show that intangible intensity has been on the rise in Europe, both due to research and development expenditure (R&D) and other firm specific intangibles. I find that smaller firms invest relatively more in intangibles, larger firms tend to have a higher share of intangible capital and that firms that invest more in intangibles tend to grow faster in revenue. Moreover, I find evidence of a slowdown in the rise of intangible intensity brought about by the Great Recession of 2008-2009, driven by a slowdown in R&D investment. Overall, the paper offers insights on the drivers and evolution of intangible intensity in Europe, and its effect on
firm growth. Moreover, it provides evidence on the long lasting scarring effects of recessions on the structural transformation process towards a more intangible intensive economy, and on economic growth potential.

Unlocking growth? EU investment programmes and firm performance

(Joint with Alessandro De Sanctis, Daniel Kapp and Robert Wojciechowski)

ECB Workign Paper No 3099 | 2025

 

Latest Version 

This study evaluates the effectiveness of EU Cohesion Policy as an investment programme, employing a novel dataset that links firm-level data from Orbis with project-level information from the Kohesio database. It focuses on two key questions: (1) Which firms receive EU funding? (2) How does receiving EU funding affect firm performance? By applying a logit model and a local projection difference-in-differences approach, we provide new insights into the allocation mechanisms of EU Cohesion Policy funds and their firm-level impact. Our findings show that funding tends to be allocated to firms that already perform relatively well, and that firms receiving EU funding experience a persistent productivity increase of approximately 3% after 4 years, with smaller and more financially constrained firms experiencing relatively greater improvements. Moreover, funding targeting “SME investment” tends to enhance firm performance disproportionately more than other categories, whereas projects directed the “green transition” appear comparatively less beneficial.

Private investment, R&D and European Structural and Investment Funds: crowding-in or crowding-out?

(Joint with Roberto A. De Santis)

ECB Working Paper No 3098 | 2025

 

Latest Version 

We employ a novel regional dataset on European private investment and business R&D spanning the years 2000 to 2021, along with comprehensive historical data on European Union Structural and Investment (ESI) funds, to estimate whether ESI funds have crowding-in or crowding-out effects on private investment and business R&D. Our analysis, leveraging regional variation and a fiscal instrument immune to region-specific shocks, reveals a significant crowding-in effect, with 1 euro in ESI funds increasing private investment by 1.1 euros and business R&D by 0.1 euros after two years. The effect is stronger in developed regions for private investment and in less developed regions for R&D. Additionally, crowding-in effects are stronger in regions where corporate private debt is relatively higher. Among the different ESI funds, the Cohesion Fund (CF) shows the largest estimated impact, while the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) yields somewhat smaller but statistically more robust results.

Oil shocks and firm investment on the two sides of the Atlantic

(Joint with Pablo Anaya Longaric, Vasileios Kostakis and Laura Parisi)

ECB Working Paper No 3116 | 2025

 

Latest Version 

Europe’s lack of energy independence raises concerns about its vulnerability to external energy shocks, such as Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. This paper examines how energy shocks impact firm-level investment, comparing European and US firm responses. Using global oil supply news shocks, S&P’s Compustat data, and a local projections approach, the study reveals that European firms significantly cut capital and R&D expenditures after an oil shock, unlike US firms. The disparity is primarily driven by financially constrained firms in energy-intensive sectors. Additionally, differences in capital market structures play a role, as European firms relying more on market-based financing reduce investment by less. Lastly, our analysis confirms that the US shale revolution was a contributing factor in shaping Europe’s relative vulnerability. These findings highlight the need for national and EU policies to secure the energy supply, lower prices, and deepen capital markets, enhancing resilience and future competitiveness amid energy volatility.

POLICY WORK
POLICY WORK

Energy shocks, corporate investment and potential implications for future EU competitiveness

(Joint with Pablo Anaya Longaric, Alessandro De Sanctis, Charlotte Grynberg and Vasileios Kostakis)

ECB Economic Bulletin Article 2025

 

Investing in Europe’s green future: green investment needs, outlook and obstacles to funding the gap

​​​

ECB Occasional Paper 2025

 

Burn now or never: The response of fossil fuel firms to climate policy

(Joint with Jakob Feveile Adolfsen,  Malte Heissel  and Ana-Simona Manu )
VoxEU Column, 2024

 

Rapid growth and strategic location: Analysing the rise of FinTechs in the EU

(Joint with Oscar Fast, Zakaria Gati, Urszula Kochanska, Claudia Lambert, Chloe Larkou, Hanni Schölermann, Evangelia Sfetsori and Thomas Teulery)
Box, ECB Report on Financial Integration and Structure in the Euro Area 2024

 

The recovery in business investment – drivers, opportunities, challenges and risks

(Joint with Malin Andersson, Claudia Di Stefano, and Yiqiao Sun)
ECB Economic Bulletin Article, Issue 5, 2022

 

TEACHING
TEACHING

Graduate Teaching Assistant/Fellow

I received certified training from the Economics Network  in 2017 and 2018

Teaching Excellence Award 2017/2018 and 2018/2019

(University of Nottingham)

Wooden Board

 " Very helpful feedback on presentation. Kind and approachable person."

Economic Integration

1st year module

2019/2020 Seminars

Wood

"Francesca went over and above to help me, and even gave me guidance on future study outside of the module. Cannot recommend her more highly, honestly the best person to have taught me this year."

Economics Dissertation

3rd year module

2018/2019 Seminars

Bark & Woodchip

 

"Amazing tutor, great at explaining things, the tutorials were really helpful"

Macroeconomic Theory

2nd year module

2017/2018 Seminars

Flowers on Wood

"She was very helpful and got a lot of ideas regarding my dissertation (.... )She even put detailed suggestions on Moodle for me under my presentation submission and even links to find more information regarding her suggestions. She was also really helpful and knew a lot regarding stata and econometrics when I asked questions during my presentation."

Economics Dissertation

3rd year module

2019/2020 Seminars and

STATA clinics

Wooden Deck

 

"Great tutor and I definitely benefited a lot from her expertise and help."

Monetary Economics

2nd year module

2018/2019 Seminars

Image by Jon Moore

 

"I thought Francesca was an excellent tutor. She was very thorough with her explanations of questions."

Quantitative Methods

1st year module

2017/2018 Seminars

bottom of page