You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


4 / 4

budget

asylum, migration, borders and the EU budget

EU Funding inside

the Union in 2014-2020

In the fields of migration, asylum and borders, the EU utilises funding tools to complement Member States’ efforts within the Union. The two main funding tools used to this effect are the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Borders and Visa strand of the Internal Security Fund (ISF). Both are part of what the EU spends on home affairs, which also includes the financing of relevant EU agencies, amounting to a total budget of around €14 billion for the 2014-2020 period

In particular, AMIF has a budget of €6.89 billion, and ISF Borders and Visa has a budget of €2.76 billion, amounting to €9.65 billion in total.

To put these figures into perspective, the budget available for the previous period (2007-2013) under the predecessors of AMIF and ISF Border and Visa was €3.93 billion, which came from the following Funds:

European Refugee Fund (ERF) – €614 million;

Integration Fund – €825 million;

Return Fund – €676 million;

External Borders Fund (EBF) – €1 820 million.

Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF)

The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) co-finances national and EU actions that aim at promoting the efficient management of migration flows, as well as the implementation, strengthening and development of a common EU approach to asylum and migration. The AMIF has four common specific objectives.

The common specific objectives of the AMIF are: Strengthening and developing the establishment of the CEAS;

Supporting legal migration to the Member States in accordance with their economic and social needs and promoting the effective integration of third-country nationals;

Enhancing fair and effective return strategies with a view to countering illegal migration;

Increasing solidarity and responsibility-sharing between the Member States, with particular focus on those most affected by migration and asylum flows. To achieve these objectives, the AMIF can co-finance actions not only in the participating Member States, but also in relation with third countries. Initiatives need to be coordinated, and consistent with the EU’s external action and the measures supported by related funding instruments.

AMIF funded measures for asylum-seekers and refugees within national programmes aim to ensure full and effective implementation of the CEAS. In the fields of legal migration and integration, initiatives seek to support national integration strategies of Member States, as well as their national legal migration strategies. As regards to irregular immigration and return, support can be given to voluntary return schemes, forced return operations, mechanisms for monitoring forced returns, investments in detention facilities and developing alternatives to detention.

Past projects financed by the EU in this area include: support and practical assistance to unaccompanied minors (Belgium); improvement of reception conditions (Estonia); and mental health services for asylum-seeking children who have been victims of torture (Finland).

The AMIF is implemented in different ways:

Shared management (Member States for national programmes);

Direct Management (European Commission for Union actions, emergency assistance, the European Migration Network and technical assistance);

Indirect management.

For the 2014-2020 period, total initial AMIF allocation was estimated at €3.14 billion. Due to the unforeseen needs resulting from the migration crisis in 2015 and 2016, the initial allocated budget was substantially increased, to a total of €6.89 billion, by the end of 2017, through top-ups to support the relocation and resettlement, integration and return, the revision of the Dublin Regulation, Union action and emergency assistance. For the 2014-2017 period, around 78 % of the AMIF resources were allocated to Member States that adopt multiannual national programmes and implement the Fund under shared management. The basic national allocations under the AMIF amount to €5.39 billion. The remaining 15 % (€1 billion) and 7 % (€0.46 billion) are allocated for emergency assistance and Union action, respectively. All Member States except Denmark participate in the Fund.

Each participating country has to devote at least a given share of the resources that it receives to certain objectives. For example, a minimum 20% of the basic allocation assigned, taking into account statistical data on migration flows, must be spent on actions aimed at strengthening and developing the CEAS.

Funding is distributed among participating countries taking into account the statistical data on migration flows.

The remainder of the Fund is implemented through direct management (European Commission) or, in some cases, indirect management (e.g. by the International Centre for Migration Policy Development or ICMPD) to support transnational actions or actions of particular interest to the EU (‘Union actions’), emergency assistance, technical assistance and the European Migration Network, which the Council established in 2008 with the task of providing reliable and comparable information on migration and asylum topics.

Examples of proposals that have been awarded emergency assistance in recent years include: establishment of an emergency day accommodation centre for irregular migrants in Calais, France (with the EU contribution amounting to €3.78 million); consolidation of reception capacities in respect of migratory flows reaching strategic border points on Italian territory (€1.71 million); capacity-building of asylum reception and human resources aiming to respond effectively to migration pressure in Hungary (€1.25 million); and addressing needs related to the mass arrival in Cyprus of third country nationals who may be in need of international protection (€0.97 million).

Internal Security Fund (ISF) Borders and Visa

The main objective of the Internal Security Fund (ISF) Borders and Visa is to contribute to ensuring a high level of security in the Union by supporting measures that promote a uniform and high level of control and protection of external borders, as well as the effective processing of Schengen visas. The two specific objectives of the instrument, which are both related to facilitating legitimate travel and tackling illegal immigration, are:

Visa Process Schengen visas effectively by supporting a common visa policy. This aims to facilitate legitimate travel to the EU, provide a high quality of service to visa applicants, ensure equal treatment of non-EU nationals and tackle irregular immigration;

Borders Achieve a uniform and high level of control and protection of external borders by supporting integrated border management, harmonising border management measures within the Union and sharing information among Member States, as well as between Member States and Frontex.

The ISF has a budget of €3.89 billion for the period 2014-2020. From this, €2.76 billion was allocated for ISF Borders and Visa, with the remainder going to ISF Police

The ISF fund can be used for a wide range of initiatives, including setting up and running IT systems, acquiring operational equipment, promoting and developing training schemes and ensuring administrative and operational coordination and cooperation.

Among past national projects supported by the EU in this policy area, examples range from the purchase of helicopters to strengthen border surveillance (Cyprus) and equipment to identify false documents (Malta), to training for Border Guard aviation employees (Poland).

From the €2.76 billion ISF Borders and Visa budget for the period 2014-2020, 65 % of the resources are channelled through shared management in the Member States. The reprogramming of the initial budget of €2.76 billion was a response to the migration crisis; this means increased allocation for emergency assistance and Frontex equipment, and the transfer of part of the funds allocated to the IT systems supporting the management of migration flows at the external borders to eu-LISA. The additional €154 million, reserved for the special transit scheme that applies to Lithuania, remains untouched. In addition to the basic amount allocated to national programmes, Member States may also receive additional resources for the implementation of specific actions.

Two tools currently playing a key role in information sharing between Schengen States in the area of borders and visa are: the Schengen Information System (SIS), which provides alerts and information on suspected criminals, on people who may not be entitled to enter into or stay in the EU, on missing persons and on stolen or lost property; and the Visa Information System (VIS), which deals with data on visa application and decisions.

Specific actions deal with the establishment of consular cooperation mechanisms between at least two Member States as well as the purchase of means of transport and operating equipment for joint operations by the Frontex Agency.

All Member States except Ireland and the United Kingdom participate in the implementation of the ISF Borders and Visa instrument. The four Schengen Associated Countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) also participate in the ISF Borders and Visa instrument.

Examples of beneficiaries of the programmes implemented under this Fund can be state and federal authorities, local public bodies, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), humanitarian organisations, private and public law companies and education and research organisations.

Each participating country implements the ISF Borders and Visa under a national programme, which has to be in line with the instrument’s goals and allocates a minimum share of the available resources to given objectives.

Following the findings and recommendations of a Schengen evaluation report in the context of the Schengen monitoring mechanism, a Member State may be required to modify its national programme with a view to addressing the identified weaknesses and prioritising ISF funding for the related corrective measures.

The remaining 35% of the reprogrammed budget for ISF Borders and Visa is, in principle, implemented through direct management by the European Commission or indirect management (for example by EU decentralised agencies).

Due to the migration crisis, the allocation for emergency assistance for the period 2014-2017, increased from an initial 1.3 % to 14.8 % of the total Fund. Union actions, which are specific cross-border or innovative measures of interest that benefit the entire EU, are decreased by a quarter to facilitate the increase in emergency assistance funds.

Examples of use of the ISF emergency funding include the acquisition of 90 fingerprinting devices (€1.36 million) to be installed at border crossings across Greece for the identification and registration of migrants in the framework of the central EURODAC system. The November 2015 allocation of ISF emergency resources to Croatia and Slovenia (respectively €3.99 million and €4.92 million) aimed to help both countries to manage high migratory flows, with financed measures including increased presence of police staff at borders and the accommodation costs of officers deployed from other Member States.

Two tools currently playing a key role in information sharing between Schengen States in the area of borders and visa are: the Schengen Information System (SIS), which provides alerts and information on suspected criminals, on people who may not be entitled to enter into or stay in the EU, on missing persons and on stolen or lost property; and the Visa Information System (VIS), which deals with data on visa application and decisions.

ISF Police

ISF Police, the other component of ISF, had initial estimated resources of €1 billion for the 2014-2020 period. However, the budget was increased to a total of €1.13 billion. By the end of 2017, a top-up of €70 million was made to support the Member States in implementing the Passenger Name Record Directive and another top-up of €22 million was made for developing information exchange and interoperability tools. The present allocations of the national programmes currently amount to €754 million (shared management), while €342 million is managed by the Commission through annual work programmes focusing on union action, emergency assistance and technical assistance at the Commission's initiative (direct or indirect management).

Agencies

In addition, the EU has six decentralised agencies in the area of home affairs, which were endowed with initial resources of €2.13 billion under the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) of the EU. These resources now amount to €4.14 billion for the six agencies.

Of these, the agencies working mainly in the fields of borders, visa or migration are: FRONTEX, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency located in Warsaw; EASO, the European Asylum Support Office based in Valletta; and eu-LISA, the Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice, which is located in Tallinn and Strasbourg. These three agencies now dispose of resources that amount to €3.21 billion for the 2014-2020 period.

Multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2027

The European Commission has proposed a 2021-2027 MFF with a new structure, which differs significantly from the current MFF. Particularly, Heading 4, Migration and Border Management includes two funds: the Asylum and Migration Fund and the Integrated Border Management Fund (IBMF) for border management, visas and customs control equipment. An Internal Security Fund, which brings together the current MFF's ISF and the Justice Programme, is included in Heading 5, Security and Defence.