Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 3 Years

171. From SMEs to Unicorns: What Role for Trade, Standards and New Tech?

Author:
Lucian Cernat
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The global economy has been shaped by important, disruptive technological changes in recent years. Many of these technologies have been instrumental in our global COVID-19 response and will become the new normal. Some of these technologies have been introduced by small firms, which grew spectacularly to become ‘unicorns’, with very high market value and global reach, setting new technological standards in their sectors. The future competitiveness of the EU economy depends on the interplay between firm size, technological progress and ability to use the opportunities offered by global markets. This paper looks at the role of trade policy in influencing this complex interplay and offers a few tentative conclusions and recommendations.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Economy, Trade, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

172. The Future of EU Leadership in the Car Industry: Still Global

Author:
David Henig and Hosuk Lee-Makiyama
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Automotive is Europe’s key export industry, an important contributor to the EU economy, from balance of payments to employment, and a manufacturing base to global and European brands; Balancing the EU’s climate ambitions (and its implied economic transformation) with a successful EU car industry is therefore crucially important. The car industry is at the forefront of new initiatives to tackle the climate emergency, shaped by these new regulations its products and infrastructure will be radically different in just a few years; Proposals within EU frameworks such as Green Deal, Fit for 55, and Next Generation EU are about reducing emissions and reshaping industry. Yet, the policy mix also leans towards increased regulatory costs and loss of competitiveness that can only be partially offset by climate subsidies and import substitution; This cumulation of measures also carries significant risk of retaliation from our key export markets for the car industry. In particular, attempts to apply green regulation extraterritorially are seen as provocative by third countries and unlikely to be accepted without response; Since the EU is the world’s largest exporter of passenger cars, it has most to lose if the global economy regresses into protected markets. Open global supply chains also enable EU manufacturing to retain competitiveness, and has also helped to keep the component and services portion of the industry going despite a relative decline of demand in motor vehicles in the EU; Consumer support for Green Deal initiatives will be lost if there are no affordable and sustainable alternatives for personal mobility – which also requires open markets. Thus, cars play a significant role in sustaining both EU macroeconomic stability and support for the Green Deal; The Green Deal and an open economy must not become a binary choice for Europe. The automotive industry is today global, digitised and electrified by default. The EU cannot mass-produce locally unless it can also compete globally – which entails facilitating industry transition, minimising retaliatory risks and understanding the biggest transition the industry is facing since Henry Ford’s invention of the assembly line.
Topic:
Globalization, European Union, WTO, Green Deal, and Automotive Industry
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

173. NATO 2030 and the out-of-area conundrum

Author:
Gorana Grgic
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
NATO Defense College
Abstract:
Over the recent years, the Indo-Pacific has grad- uated from being a geostrategic term reserved for a relatively niche community of analysts to an almost ubiquitous, albeit still fuzzy concept that in generous interpretation could capture as much as five continents. The fact that policymakers around the world are paying greater attention to the region is no doubt a reflection of the impact security and econom- ic developments in this realm have on the rest of the world, and which are by and large a direct consequence, or a by-product of, China’s growing power and asser- tiveness. Thus, a number of NATO Allies have been adjusting their approaches to the region, its key players, and potential Allies and partners. This shift in strategic attention has coincided with a growing foreign policy consensus in the United States and allied states towards ending the “forever wars” in the Greater Middle East, and ceasing the so-called era of out-of-area (OOA) missions by NATO. The Alli- ance has been deemed to have strayed from its orig- inal mission of deterring and defending against Rus- sian aggression in Eastern Europe, which became even more apparent following Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and intervention in Ukraine in 2014. Yet, as more NATO member states look towards re- sponding to challenges emanating from the Indo-Pa- cific, the prospects of future OOA operations in this region are becoming likelier than at any point in the post-Cold War era. This in turn leads to a slew of ques- tions around the conceptualisation and execution of potential OOA operations in the Indo-Pacific. At pres- ent, the institutional leadership is adamant: “(T)here is no way that NATO will move into the South China Sea”,1 while some of the major and middle powers in the Alliance are far from foreclosing that option. This Policy Brief first sketches out the strategic vision of those member states that have articulated Indo-Pa- cific strategies, after which it turns to the concept of OOA driven by new strategic imperatives. It concludes by proposing a framework of assessment for the pros- pects of coordination and cooperation among NATO Allies in the Indo-Pacific, and offers some preliminary thoughts on the near- to medium-run OOA activities.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, International Cooperation, Military Strategy, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Global Focus

174. A Crucial Link: Using Intellectual Property to Inform Global Supply Chain Policy

Author:
Philip C. Rogers
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with trade tensions and technological competition between the United States and China, have severely disrupted global supply chains. As businesses and policymakers grapple with “building back better” in a tense trade environment, they face the dilemma of balancing the traditional benefits of global production with the security demands of new geopolitical realities. This policy brief, part of a series on great power competition, highlights the productive role that intellectual property (IP) can play in navigating supply chain disruptions resulting from great power competition in a post-pandemic world. Rather than reinforcing the vicious cycle of techno-nationalist confrontation, it is possible for businesses and policymakers to promote virtuous cycles of competition with a more robust focus on intellectual property. Specifically, businesses and policymakers can look to IP licensing and allocation of rights to play a key role in tariff mitigation strategies and supply chain restructuring. At the same time, competitive pressures can lead to enhanced IP regimes in China and other economies, which argues for a more nuanced discussion of supply chains beyond physical relocation and economic decoupling.
Topic:
National Security, Intellectual Property/Copyright, Innovation, Strategic Competition, COVID-19, Supply Chains, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
China, Global Focus, and United States of America

175. Why Summit Optics May Help De-escalate Public Appetite for Conflict

Author:
Max Plithides
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC)
Abstract:
As competition between democracies and autocratic adversaries such as North Korea, Iran, Russia, and China intensifies, democratic publics may increasingly pressure their politicians to take a more confrontational stance. The implications are dangerous. Public pressure for confrontation during the Cold War caused numerous foreign policy fiascos.1 Public pressure also at times undermined the broad political unity necessary for concluding diplomatic agreements— even between democratic allies.2 How then, as the world enters a new era of great power competition, can public pressure and anger be defused and foreign policy put on a more rational footing? This policy brief, part of a series on great power competition, argues that bilateral summits with autocratic leaders may have a key role to play in shifting the public’s collective emotional ethos. It analyzes results from a large-scale survey experiment, designed around the historic 2018 Singapore Summit, which represented the first-ever meeting of the leaders of North Korea and the United States and was preceded by months of saber rattling.3 According to conventional logic the Summit was worthless: It produced a joint communiqué with “no concrete specifics”4 and had no effect on President Trump’s approval rating.5 Yet evidence shows that joint photographs from the Summit reduced bellicosity in American public opinion towards North Korea by allowing President Trump to act as a visual empathetic mediator. The Singapore Summit thus broadly evinces the potential value of bilateral summits to reduce tensions with autocratic adversaries.
Topic:
Democracy, Citizenship, Strategic Competition, and Autocracy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

176. Negotiating Consent: Lessons in defending the right to decide

Author:
Scott A. Sellwood
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Indigenous peoples have long asserted and defended their rights and customary land tenures against the unlawful enclosure of their territories. Yet, despite normative recognition of the right to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC)—and public commitments by major multinational companies, international financial institutions, and global banks to apply the standard of consent—power imbalances continue to undermine the quality of agreements being reached. Negotiating Consent distills lessons from Oxfam’s work defending community consent in Peru. Drawing on research published by Oxfam partners in Peru—Cooperacción, Organización Nacional de Mujeres Indígenas (ONAMIAP) and Pueblos Indígenas Amazónicas Unidas en Defensa de Sus Territorios (PUINAMUDT), which have published research examining the politics and practices of the implementation of this law—it seeks to contribute to collective thinking around ways to improve the implementation of FPIC processes, processes that are manifestly political. With land inequality worsening, land grabbing continuing unabated, and basic environmental and social protections being rolled back, upholding the standard of consent is more important than ever. It is time companies, investors, and others look beyond paper commitments and take the steps necessary to ensure quality agreements are reached with Indigenous peoples and are maintained across the life of projects.
Topic:
Security, Land Rights, Indigenous, and Land
Political Geography:
Global Focus

177. The Ignored Pandemic: The Dual Crises of Gender-Based Violence and COVID-19

Author:
Rowan Harvey
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Gender Based Violence (GBV) is a global pandemic existing in all social groups across the globe, yet it has largely been ignored in the COVID-19 response and recovery plans. It is evident that the COVID-19 pandemic has intensified GBV, including domestic violence and intimate partner violence amongst other forms of violations, but the investments in GBV prevention and response are dramatically inadequate, with just 0.0002% of the overall COVID-19 response funding opportunities going into it. Barriers to achieving gender justice, such as harmful social norms, continue to exist, but progress made since the start of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Campaign show that there are solutions, and feminist activism has been a driving force for progress on eliminating gender-based violence.
Topic:
Gender Based Violence, Violence, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Gender
Political Geography:
Global Focus

178. Food for Thought: Investing in a sustainable food system

Author:
Marta Piazza
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
The focus on profit maximization at the expense of workers, farmers, and women have helped companies reap huge profit margins in the short-term, but as COVID-19 has revealed, it has come at the cost of rights violations. Such costs are no longer considered an acceptable business risk. As human rights gains prominence in investor-company engagement, this briefing note provides information to investors about the risks of ignoring human rights impacts, evidence about the rights violations that persist in the food sector despite company action and charts a way for investors to build a resilient food system given their outsized influence.
Topic:
Economics, Business, Profit, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

179. Transforming the Systems that Contribute to Fragility and Humanitarian Crises: Programming across the triple nexus

Author:
Vittorio Infante
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Conflicts and shocks linked to climate change are more frequent and intense, leading to poverty and inequality, exacerbating these phenomena and people’s vulnerability. In this context, humanitarian relief, development programmes and peacebuilding are not serial processes; they are all needed at the same time to tackle the systemic inequalities that trap people in poverty and expose them to risk. The triple nexus, or programming across humanitarian-development-peace pillars, thus means creating synergies and common goals across short-term emergency response programmes and longer-term social change processes in development, as well as enhancing opportunities for peace so that individuals can enjoy the full spectrum of human rights. This briefing paper aims to identify the tensions and dilemmas that Oxfam faces when programming across the nexus and sets out new policy to address these dilemmas, building upon Oxfam’s 2019 discussion paper on the triple nexus.
Topic:
Development, Inequality, Humanitarian Intervention, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

180. Not in This Together: How supermarkets became pandemic winners while women workers are losing out

Author:
Anouk Franck and Art Prapha
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
Inequality is worsening and exploitation of women is endemic across the global economy. While inequality of power and value was already deeply unfair before the pandemic, it has now reached shocking proportions. COVID-19 has cost global workers $3.7 trillion in lost income, and women and young workers have been hardest hit, as they are often found in the most insecure and lowest-paid jobs. Few places reveal this trend more clearly than supermarket supply chains. In stark contrast to the escalating human misery brought by the pandemic, the supermarket sector has largely been the standout winner of the crisis. Senior executives, the largest institutional investors, and mostly wealthy shareholders of global supermarkets continue to be rewarded with business-as-usual high compensation and dividends. In fact, during the pandemic, publicly listed supermarkets distributed 98% of net profits to their shareholders via dividends and share buybacks. Meanwhile, workers and producers, especially women, across the globe – the people we call ‘essential’ or ‘frontline’ workers – have seen their incomes stagnate or even fall, while their rights continue to be violated.
Topic:
Inequality, Pandemic, COVID-19, Labor Rights, and Gender
Political Geography:
Global Focus