Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 25 Years Publication Year within 10 Years

21. Security for All: Applying the Women, Peace and Security Lens to the COVID-19 Pandemic Response in the U.S.

Author:
Kelly Case, Sahana Dharmapuri, Hans Hogrefe, Miki Jacevic, Jolynn Shoemaker, Moira Whelan, and Erin Cooper
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Our Secure Future
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic does not respect borders or power. Armies, weapons, and fortifications will not destroy it. COVID-19 is a national security threat of a different kind. It has killed tens of thousands of Americans so far and has resulted in the complete shutdown of the American economy in just a few months. The United States and countries around the world need to reexamine what it takes for people to be safe. Policymakers can look to the Women, Peace and Security agenda (WPS) for guidance and urgently needed solutions. Policymakers have primarily focused on the Women, Peace and Security agenda exclusively in the foreign policy arena. It has important application for domestic policy as well, especially for achieving policy goals that link to security and prosperity for American families and communities.
Topic:
Security, Women, Peace, and WPS
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

22. Maternal Mortality and Maternity Care in the United States Compared to 10 Other Developed Countries

Author:
Laurie Zephyrin, Molly FitzGerald, Munira Z. Gunja, and Roosa Tikkanen
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Commonwealth Fund
Abstract:
The U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rate among developed countries. Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) are overrepresented in its maternity care workforce relative to midwives, and there is an overall shortage of maternity care providers (both ob-gyns and midwives) relative to births. In most other countries, midwives outnumber ob-gyns by severalfold, and primary care plays a central role in the health system. Although a large share of its maternal deaths occur postbirth, the U.S. is the only country not to guarantee access to provider home visits or paid parental leave in the postpartum period.
Topic:
Health, Health Care Policy, Women, and Reproductive Health
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

23. Flattening the Pandemic and Recession Curves

Author:
Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
In the short run, the capacity of any country’s health system is finite (capacity of Intensive Care Units, number of hospital beds, number of skilled health professionals, ventilators….). This puts an upper bound on the number of patients that can be properly treated, at any given point in time and is represented by the flat line in the Figure. Unchecked, and given what we know of the transmission rate of the coronavirus, the pandemic would quickly overwhelm any health system, leaving many infected patients with deteriorating pulmonary conditions without any treatment. The fatality rate would surge. The threat is almost beyond comprehension. With a 2% case fatality rate baseline for overwhelmed health systems, and 50% of the world population infected, 1% of the world population -76 million people- would die. This scenario corresponds to the red curve in Figure 1. The part of the curve above the capacity of the health care system faces a sharply higher mortality risk (shaded red area).
Topic:
Economics, International Political Economy, Health Care Policy, Economic Growth, Macroeconomics, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Global Health
Political Geography:
United States

24. Coronavirus and Managing Your Organization’s Response

Author:
Anton Korinek
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Nkafu Policy Institute
Abstract:
Organizations around the world are working through how to respond to the novel coronavirus, posing one of the greatest challenges to leaders in a long time. Do they restrict travel? Doing so would have substantial financial implication, make months of preparation worthless and lower the morale of many stakeholders who enjoy travel. However, travel is what brought the coronavirus to the country in the first place — and what continues to spread it to new communities within the country. What about instituting remote work procedures? In-person meetings and events may be a critical part of an organization’s activities and an important part of the value it offers. Perhaps there are no known cases of the virus in a given community. However, once it does gain a foothold, social distancing is the only way to slow the spread. Carriers of the virus may unwittingly spread it for days before symptoms manifest themselves. Above all, one of the greatest challenges is to balance an organization’s economic concerns with the question of what is ethically the best course of action.
Topic:
Economics, International Political Economy, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

25. Racial Inequality

Author:
Lisa D. Cook and Trevon Logan
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
The origins of American capitalism in the institutions of slavery continues to cast a long shadow. As the economist William Darity Jr. has written, the dead hand of history weighs heavily on us because the dead hand of history remains fitfully alive. Contemporary racial inequality can be thought of as the product of a long historical process with at least two reinforcing sets of policies. The first would be policies governing the spatial distribution of the black population. The second would be policies that had a disparate impact on black individuals because of their locations. Understanding current black-white gaps in income, wealth and education require understanding the complex relationship between regional inequality, race and policies at the local, state, and national levels. In this article, we outline the ways that the spatial distribution of the black population has evolved over time and the ways that spatial distribution has interacted with policy to, at times, reduce and exacerbate levels of inequality. Recognizing the ways that past policies explicitly stymied black economic mobility and how current policies have explicitly or inadvertently done the same provides a basis for understanding how to craft future policies to reduce racial inequalities. Furthermore, recognizing the interconnection of discrimination and the spatial distribution of the black population is important for understanding certain components of regional and spatial inequality. The difference in location within regions makes it inevitable that policies that differentially affect urban and rural areas will have disparate effects by race. A recent example of this is the proposed Medicaid work requirement in Michigan. The original version of Michigan Senate Bill 897 exempted individuals from this work requirement conditional on residing in a county with an unemployment rate above 8.5 percent. The spatial distribution of the white and black populations of Michigan meant that this exemption would have racially disparate impacts; given that poor white individuals disproportionately live in rural areas and black individuals live in urban areas, the higher unemployment rates in rural counties would disproportionately exempt white Medicaid recipients from the work requirement within the bill. Although—after considerable negative press—the exemption was dropped from the final version of the work requirement bill, this incident reveals the complex interplay between policy, inequality across space, and inequality between races. Even if a policy like the unemployment rate exemption in the Michigan bill is crafted without discriminatory intent, it can nonetheless increase racial inequality. In the following sections we explore the how policy has shaped the geographic and economic mobility of the black population over the past century and a half, drawing from the large literatures on regional inequality and racial discrimination that have all too often been treated in isolation from one another.
Topic:
Economics, Race, Capitalism, Inequality, Slavery, Macroeconomics, Reparations, Racism, and Systemic Racism
Political Geography:
United States

26. Why, When, and How to Teach the Fundamentals of Inequality in Principles

Author:
Can Erbil and Geoffrey Sanzenbacher
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
The continued rise of economic inequality in the U.S. has been on the radar of economists and policymakers for the last few years. New initiatives and platforms like EfIP (Economics for Inclusive Prosperity) have emerged, where economists work on creating fresh and useful policy ideas to promote more “inclusive” models of generating prosperity. Yet, students still face a lot of confusion, “noise,” and disagreement when it comes to the topic of inequality.[1] Especially in the age of easy access to information online, students not fully literate in economics struggle to sift through the literature and separate rigorous scientifically based research from opinion pieces. This article discusses a way to introduce some recent trends in U.S. inequality to students, and then delve into a specific topic (e.g., racial inequality) in a two-lecture module at the end of an introductory economics course. After all, it is not that the students are not interested in this topic. But, left alone, many of them become confused. Students do not make distinctions between different broad types of inequalities, such as income inequality, wealth inequality, or inequality of opportunity. They do not understand differences in the underlying causes of inequality, which vary depending on whether the topic is inequality across educational groups, gender-based groups, or racial/ethnic groups. And, they make basic mistakes in reading articles or viewing data, such as mixing-up correlation with causation or looking at graphs with different scales. Fortunately, introductory economics courses have a chance to reach students early in their careers, and correct many of these deficiencies. Indeed, recent events in the US compel us to cover inequality and its consequences in our introductory classes. The economic impact of the COVID-19 epidemic falls significantly more on minorities, women, people with lower income levels and people of color.[2] And, the disparities in poverty and opportunity rates between black and non-black populations is at the root of racial discrimination which re-ignited the BLM movement.[3] Indeed, economic inequality is also related to other disciplines in Social Sciences, such as Sociology, Political Science and even Liberal Arts courses such as History and English. However, Economics faculty are well-equipped to cover the empirical outcomes and the underlying economic models – and lay out their strengths as well as short-comings. Given that teaching about economic inequality is an important task, this article will first discuss when it makes sense to teach it. The article will then spend the majority of its time providing some tips for covering the material, as well as some suggested assignments.
Topic:
Economics, Education, Inequality, Economic Inequality, Macroeconomics, and Models
Political Geography:
United States

27. Restraining Ourselves: Helping by Not Hurting

Author:
Nathan Nunn
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
In this brief, I discuss the current state of economic development policy, which tends to focus on interventions, usually funded with foreign aid, that are aimed at fixing deficiencies in developing countries. The general perception is that there are inherent problems with less-developed countries that can be fixed by with the help of the Western world. I discuss evidence that shows that the effects of such ‘help’ can be mixed. While foreign aid can improve things, it can also make things worse. In addition, at the same time that this ‘help’ is being offered, the developed West regularly undertakes actions that are harmful to developing countries. Examples include tariffs, antidumping duties, restrictions on international labor mobility, the use of international power and coercion, and tied-aid used for export promotion. Overall, it is unclear whether interactions with the West are, on the whole, helpful or detrimental to developing countries. We may have our largest and most positive effects on alleviating global poverty if we focus on restraining ourselves from actively harming less-developed countries rather than focusing our efforts on fixing them.
Topic:
Development, Economics, International Political Economy, Developing World, and Economic Development
Political Geography:
United States and Global Focus

28. Considering the "Zero Option"

Author:
Mike Sweeney
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
The strategic importance of the Middle East has declined, but Washington has so far inadequately adjusted. Diversification of energy sources and reduction in external threats to the region make the Middle East less important to U.S. interests.
Topic:
Cold War, Military Strategy, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
United States and Middle East

29. U.S. Nuclear Excess: Understanding the Costs, Risks, and Alternatives

Author:
Kingston Reif and Alicia Sanders-Zakre
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Arms Control Association
Abstract:
In a little-noticed comment before his controversial July 2018 summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, U.S. President Donald Trump characterized his government’s multi-hundred billion dollar plans to replace the aging U.S. nuclear arsenal as “a very, very bad policy.” He seemed to express some hope that Russia and the United States, which together possess over 90 percent of the planet’s nuclear warheads, could chart a different path and avert renewed military and nuclear competition. The Helsinki meeting, however, did not produce any agreement on nuclear weapons and Trump has so far shown little interest in a different nuclear spending path. Quite the opposite, in fact.“We have far more money than anybody else by far,” Trump said last October. “We’ll build [the U.S. nuclear arsenal] up until” other nuclear-armed states such as Russia and China “come to their senses.” Citing a deteriorating international security environment, the Trump administration is pursuing a significant expansion of the role and capability of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. In addition to continuing full speed ahead with its predecessor’s plans to replace the nuclear triad and its associated warheads on largely a like-for-like basis, the administration is proposing to broaden the circumstances under which the United States would consider the first use of nuclear weapons, develop two new sea-based, lowyield nuclear options, and lay the groundwork to grow the size of the arsenal. At the same time, key U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control agreements, which serve to regulate the nuclear balance and prevent unconstrained nuclear competition, are now in serious doubt. The Trump administration has announced the United States will leave the landmark 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in August 2019 unless Russia returns to compliance with the pact, and expressed hostility towards extending the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START). New START expires in 2021 but can be extended by up to five years subject to the agreement of Washington and Moscow. In short, the Trump administration is preparing to compete in a new nuclear arms race while simultaneously increasing the likelihood of such a contest. The projected cost of the proposed nuclear spending spree is staggering and it is growing. The United States currently plans to spend nearly $500 billion, after including the effects of inflation, to maintain and replace its nuclear arsenal over the next decade, according to a January 2019 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report. This is an increase of nearly $100 billion, or about 23 percent, above the already enormous projected cost as of the end of the Obama administration. Over the next 30 years, the price tag is likely to top $1.5 trillion and could even approach $2 trillion. These big nuclear bills are coming due as the Defense Department is seeking to replace large portions of its conventional forces and internal and external fiscal pressures are likely to limit the growth of—and perhaps reduce—military spending. “We’re going to have enormous pressure on reducing the debt which means that defense spending—I’d like to tell you it’s going to keep going up—[but] I’m not terribly optimistic,” Alan Shaffer, deputy under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, said in February 2019. This report outlines the ways in which the Trump administration’s nuclear strategy is unnecessary, unsustainable, and unsafe. It describes three realistic options to reduce spending on nuclear weapons while still maintaining a devastating nuclear deterrent. Scores of billions of dollars could be saved or redirected to higher priorities by eliminating, delaying, or scaling back the administration’s proposals for new delivery systems, warheads, and infrastructure.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, International Security, Nonproliferation, Denuclearization, and Arms Race
Political Geography:
Russia and United States

30. Rescuing multilateralism

Author:
Anthony Dworkin and Richard Gowan
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Multilateralism is core to Europe’s approach to foreign policy, but in recent years this has weakened as EU countries disagree among themselves. The US, China, and Russia have each sought to challenge or disrupt the existing, post-1945 world order; and each seeks to divide Europeans from one another. The turmoil in the current system represents an opportunity for Europeans to shape a new order that meets their strategic needs. In addition to the fight against climate change, European interests include: increasing stability on its troubled periphery; managing migration more effectively; and defending the open world trading system. European countries will need to transform EU foreign policy decision-making processes, deepen their cooperation in multilateral settings, and set multilateral standards for emerging technologies.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Climate Change, Migration, Political stability, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, China, and Europe