Welcome back to Fraser Insight, the Fraser Institute’s U.S. newsletter. This autumn issue of Insight showcases a number of outputs and initiatives that focused on economic freedom.

As always, the In Print section features an interesting mix of op-eds and blogs. This issue includes essays exposing how autocratic regimes manipulate statistics (and thus impact the Economic Freedom of the World rankings); the political consequences of Venezuela’s economic policies; the serious problems governments face in trying to force a transition away from fossil fuels; and several other timely pieces.

The In Focus section highlights in-depth research reports, including studies digging into the defining characteristics of economic freedom and the shortsightedness of industrial policy.

Finally, our In Context section offers a recap of our annual EFNA Network conference, which brought together 21 partner organizations for panel discussions, presentations, and networking in Dallas last month.

We encourage you to share Insight with friends and colleagues by inviting them to sign up for Insight here. Visit our website, which serves as a storehouse for cogent commentary and in-depth analysis—all from a free-market perspective. Follow us on X (formerly Twitter). Join us on Facebook. And check out the In Touch section for more contact info.

The reality is that global demand for oil is set to rise in the coming years.

The transition away from fossil fuels as the predominant source of energy will be a lengthy and arduous journey—and is sure to encounter more obstacles than the political class understands or cares to acknowledge.

In 1970, Venezuelans were the wealthiest people in Latin America. With annual incomes comparable to those of the Finns and the Japanese, they earned two-and-a-half times what the average Latin American earned. Their wealth bought them longer life, lower infant mortality, and some measure of safety. But today, as the United Socialist Party’s Nicolás Maduro tries to steal another term as president, it’s a very different story.

During a recent speech in Brazil, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that “many sources”—including governments—must spend “no less than $3 trillion” each year for the world to achieve “net-zero” global carbon emissions by 2050.

The climate-obsessed folks want your barbecues gone, your road trips gone, your air conditioning coolant weakened or gone, and so on.

The EFW report often underestimates the potency of economic freedom. Why? Because the economic statistics produced in countries ruled by autocrats are not believable. In autocratic regimes, rulers must bolster their legitimacy to prevent coups or uprisings, so they produce statistics that exaggerate their country's performance. And since neither the opposition nor independent authorities are allowed to challenge these claims, autocrats can get away with lying about the size of their economies.

The key premise behind industrial policy is that the government can and should promote the expansion of specific industries and activities. The corollary is that the private sector, if left to itself, will underinvest in industries promising large net social benefits. Most economists have criticized the underlying premise of industrial policy. In particular, critics of industrial policy argue that bureaucrats ordinarily do not have the knowledge or the incentive to reallocate productive resources so as to accelerate real economic growth. Case studies of industrial policy initiatives tend to support this criticism.

Some believe economic freedom makes life better by enabling material prosperity, reducing conflict and fostering trust. Others argue that too much economic freedom makes life worse by, for example, undermining social cohesion, exacerbating inequalities, and permitting exploitation of workers and the environment. This report offers a three-step approach to resolve this debate. Step One is to precisely define human and economic freedom. Step Two is to measure economic freedom. Step Three is to use this measure to test the various claims that have been made.

Opponents of hydraulic fracturing assert that the process poses innumerable risks to the environment and human health—and have lobbied governments to ban hydraulic fracturing. Since 2014, Fraser Institute researchers have conducted periodic surveys of the literature assessing the environmental and health risks of hydraulic fracturing. Generally, they found that while the risks posited by opponents of hydraulic fracturing are real, they are neither high nor overly frequent and could be mitigated with changes to the hydraulic fracturing practice. This report is the latest update to that body of research.

Sonia Arrison, best-selling author of 100 Plus: How the Coming Age of Longevity Will Change Everything from Careers and Relationships to Family and Faith and founder of 100 Plus Capital, joins the podcast to discuss the policy implications that flow from technology’s impact on lifespans.

Members of the EFNA Network gathered in Dallas in late September for their annual conference, which focused on “Bridging the Gap between Institutions and Policy.” Twenty-one partner organizations, 16 states and territories, and three countries were represented at the conference, which was cohosted by the Fraser Institute and SMU’s Bridwell Institute for Economic Freedom.

Bob Ewing, president of the Ewing School, delivered a keynote presentation that helped attendees identify ways to communicate the message of economic freedom in their circles of influence, cities and states.

Matthew Mitchell, director of Fraser Institute’s Center for Economic Freedom, and Vance Ginn, a visiting economist for several EFNA Network members, led a discussion on bridging the institution-policy gap. The Bridwell Institute’s Meg Tuszynski described how her team is sharing EFNA research “beyond the ivory tower.” Paul Gessing, president of the Rio Grande Foundation (New Mexico), and Collin Hodges, assistant professor at the Arkansas Center for Research in Economics at the University of Central Arkansas, delivered presentations focused on ways to disseminate the EFNA report.

Jennifer Apperti, director of the Texas-Mexico Center at SMU, and José Torra, head of research at Caminos de la Libertad in Mexico City, led a fascinating panel exploring what to expect on the policy front from Mexico’s new president, Claudia Steinbaum. And EFNA’s authors offered a sneak peek of what the forthcoming report (to be published in November) reveals about the state of economic freedom across North America.

The EFNA Network now enfolds 64 partner institutions in 47 U.S. states/territories, Canada, and Mexico. The Empire Center (New York), the Stavros Center for Economic Education at Florida State University, the Center for Regional Economic Research at the University of Tennessee-Chattanooga, the Knee Regulatory Research Center at West Virginia University, and the Center for Free Enterprise at West Virginia University all joined the Network this year.