Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Special Report

151. Fragile States Index 2021 – Annual Report

Author:
Natalie Fiertz, Nate Haken, Patricia Taft, Emily Sample, and Wendy Wilson
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Fund for Peace
Abstract:
The Fragile States Index, produced by The Fund for Peace, is a critical tool in highlighting not only the normal pressures that all states experience, but also in identifying when those pressures are pushing a state towards the brink of failure. By highlighting pertinent issues in weak and failing states, The Fragile States Index—and the social science framework and software application upon which it is built—makes political risk assessment and early warning of conflict accessible to policy-makers and the public at large.
Topic:
Climate Change, Authoritarianism, Employment, Fragile States, Economy, Political stability, Conflict, Crisis Management, Peace, Resilience, COVID-19, Health Crisis, Early Warning, and Risk Assessment
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, Middle East, Tajikistan, Germany, Armenia, Central America, Spain, Lebanon, Timor-Leste, North America, Ethiopia, Southeast Asia, El Salvador, Global Focus, and United States of America

152. Monitoring Online Political Advertising: A Toolkit

Author:
Barbara Jouan Stonestreet and Michael Baldassaro
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
During an electoral process, electoral actors, whether contestants or noncontestants, have the right to advertise political ideas in accordance with the right of expression. However, political advertising may be subject to reasonable limitations through regulations imposed by domestic law, including who can run political advertisements, when and where they may run advertisements, restrictions on advertising expenditure levels, and reporting and disclosure requirements to ensure transparency, accountability, and a level playing field. Increasingly, election contestants and noncontestants are using social media platforms to advertise political ideas.
Topic:
Politics, Elections, Internet, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

153. Our Identities under Arrest

Author:
Kellyn Botha
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
ILGA World (International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association)
Abstract:
Arrests and prosecutions for consensual same-sex sexual acts, or for diverse gender expressions, continue unabated across the world. And yet, they are considerably under-reported. Our Identities Under Arrest is a brand-new publication by ILGA World offering a global overview of the enforcement of laws criminalising consensual same-sex sexual acts between adults and diverse gender expressions. The report reviews hundreds of cases in which law enforcements subjected LGBT and gender-diverse persons to fines, arbitrary arrests, prosecutions, corporal punishments, imprisonments and more – up to (possibly) the death penalty. Governments often argue that criminalising laws are ‘dormant’, but this report offers evidence that such claims are largely inaccurate. How – and how often – they are enforced can vary abruptly and in unpredictable ways, making both our communities on the ground and asylum seekers who managed to flee live perpetually under threat. The Our Identities under Arrest report will be of great value to the advocacy work of human rights defenders. It will assist asylum seekers and the legal experts working on their cases. And it will provide researchers, media outlets, governmental and global agencies with the necessary information to build a holistic picture of how the criminalisation on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression really looks like.
Topic:
Human Rights, Law Enforcement, LGBT+, and Criminalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

154. Sustainable carbon removal

Author:
David R. Morrow and Simon Nicholson
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Carbon Removal Law and Policy, American University
Abstract:
Carbon removal, which involves capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and sequestering it, can help us meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. The key question is not just how to make large-scale carbon removal operational, but how to make it sustainable. Sustainable practices balance environmental, social, and economic goals. Sustainable carbon removal balances those goals in order to meet the needs of the future without compromising the ability of current generations to meet their own needs. To operationalize this idea, we need to ask two questions: How should we measure the environmental, social, and economic impacts of carbon? How should we decide when carbon removal strikes the right balance between future and present needs? Analyzing carbon removal at different levels can illuminate environmental, social, and economic risks and opportunities. Levels of analysis range from broad technological categories, like reforestation, to specific projects, like Climeworks’ Orca direct air capture project in Iceland. Most analyses have focused on broad technological categories, but more fine-grained analyses are crucial for delivering actionable advice. Finding metrics for environmental, social, and economic impacts is vital for quantifying positive and negative impacts and comparing approaches. One possibility is to use the indicators for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which are politically negotiated, internationally accepted metrics of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Determining which approaches are most sustainable requires balancing different positive and negative impacts that may not be easily comparable. There are several ways to do this, ranging from intuitive judgments to multicriteria decision analysis, although any decisions about which approaches are most sustainable are ultimately political decisions. In summary, to develop sustainable carbon removal, we need to identify sustainability metrics, such as the indicators behind the Sustainable Development Goals; apply those metrics at different levels of analysis; and develop strategies for determining which approaches strike the right balance between environmental, social, and economic goals.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Sustainable Development Goals, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Global Focus

155. Self-Determination and Sea-Level Rise

Author:
Barbara Buckinx, Matthew Edbrooke, and Rana Ibrahem
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
This report summarizes a workshop held jointly by the Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination at Princeton University (LISD) and the Liechtenstein Mission to the United Nations, New York, between September and December 2020. The workshop and this report are products of LISD’s Project on Self-Determination, Environment, and Migration. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the workshop was divided into four seminars, taking place via video teleconference and under the Chatham House Rule.
Topic:
Environment, Migration, Self Determination, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

156. Gender, Law, and Security: Selected Student Research from the Project on Gender and the Global Community, 2019-2020

Author:
Barbara Buckinx, Beth English, Jake Gutman, Seoyoung Hong, Mikaylah Ladue, Katrin Lewis, and Liza Paudel
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, Princeton University
Abstract:
Who is the ‘self’ in self-determination? Feminist scholars and activists have long noted that, when self-determination means primarily non-interference in the internal affairs of a governing body, practices and traditions through which men dominate women can flourish. In order to fully realize the promise of the concept of self-determination, it is therefore best understood in both collective and individual forms. Women across the world have long sought to influence and shape the nature of their own lives, with a gendered understanding of power and how hierarchies of power are not only created and maintained, and perpetuate inequalities, but also how they can potentially be reorganized and remade. In this spirit, the research agenda and related activities of the Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination at Princeton University’s Project on Gender in the Global Community (GGC) uses gender as a primary lens for analysis and starting point for broader dialogues about sustainable development, state building, economic and political participation, negotiation and mediation, peace, and security. The GGC Student Fellows Program, inaugurated during the 2017-18 academic year, has been an integral complement to this work. Building on student interest in the GGC project and modeled on the successful student fellows program organized as part of LISD’s Project on Religion, Diplomacy and International Relations (PORDIR), a dedicated student cohort of Princeton students ranging from first-year undergraduates to Ph.D. candidates and postdocs, were selected through a competitive application process. Over the course of the 2019-20 fellowship year, GGC fellows pursued independent, academically rigorous research, a sampling of which is presented in this publication. In December 2019, they presented their projects alongside peers from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs during a joint student research day. The papers in this volume include the written output of this independent work, which represents a variety of disciplines and methodologies and reflect the range of work undertaken by GGC students throughout the year.
Topic:
Governance, Law, Self Determination, Influence, and Gender
Political Geography:
Global Focus

157. Geopolitics of the World’s Forests: Strategies for Tackling Deforestation

Author:
Alain Karsenty
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
Deforestation continues at a worrying pace worldwide, except in temperate and boreal countries. It is caused by the race for land, underpinned by population growth and rising global demand for “deforestation-prone” products. Moreover, with climate change, mega-fires are now posing unprecedented threats to forests. China has a major influence on the evolution of the world’s forests through its trade and investment in infrastructures for the Belt and Road Initiative. The country has stopped the exploitation of its natural forests, but it is using imports to meet its huge timber needs, while its demand for agricultural products carrying risks of deforestation is also growing, such as soybeans and palm oil. In Africa and Southeast Asia, large European forestry firms are in retreat, given the expansion of Asian firms (from Malaysia, China, and Vietnam), and agribusiness firms are gaining influence everywhere. Major reforestation operations are, at best, of limited effectiveness when they are not accompanied by the recognition of land rights, and when they lead to monoculture plantations with fast-growing tree species. By contrast, independent certifications appear to be essential tools for forest management and ensuring zero-deforestation production. Finally, the United Nations’ REDD+ mechanism pays countries that reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, or that increase their carbon stocks through plantations. Yet, REDD+ is criticized because it relies on reference scenarios: the anticipated emissions paths presented by the countries themselves. Moreover, it always faces the problem of the “non-permanence” of carbon storage in forests or plantations that may burn or simply die. At the same time, companies’ growing concerns to offset some of their emissions has generated strong demand for carbon credits from forest projects. Hundreds of “REDD+ projects” have emerged, relying on specific certifications to support the issuance of carbon credits in “voluntary markets.” This entails risks of double-counting emission reductions at the national level. Moreover, the uncertain additionality and the risks of “leakage” (shifting deforestation pressures elsewhere) cast doubt on the environmental integrity of these private initiatives. Finally, the success of “REDD+ projects” remains conditional on taking into account the problems of land security of rural inhabitants, a key factor in reforestation, and in their access to land. While institutionalized consensuses continue to pile up, there is in fact an urgent need to reconsider existing instruments, taking into account systemic and political economy questions which are too often ignored. The 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP15) is scheduled to take place in China in October 2021, and needs to participate in the necessary leap forward on global forest governance: The principle of “results-based payment” (RBP) should be complemented by broad support for the investments needed to “produce” these results. It should only retain the coherence of public policies that have real potential impacts on forests as an essential criterion for assessing results. The demand for products linked to deforestation must be strictly controlled. Governments should review trade agreements with countries that encourage land-forest conversion and include measures to tackle deforestation that are legally binding. Imports of products involved in illegal deforestation must be banned, and tariffs must favor products certified as involving zero deforestation. Developing countries should be helped to implement incentive-based environmental taxation to support agricultural production based on zero-deforestation and sustainable forests. Fiscally neutral bonus-malus systems could favor traced and certified production and penalize production whose origin is uncertain and presumably unsustainable. A common agenda for food security, tackling deforestation and restoring degraded natural ecosystems needs to be built with developing countries. Ecological intensification through peasant-farmer agroecology, crop-livestock associations and agroforestry should become priorities. Necessary investments could be channeled through programs of payments for ecosystem services (PES). Finally, the forest concession regimes must evolve to include the recognition of overlapping rights, the commercial management of new resources and the sharing of profits.
Topic:
Climate Change, Governance, Carbon Emissions, Forest, and Deforestation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

158. The Global Quest for Sustainability: The Role of Green Infrastructure in a Post-Pandemic World

Author:
Carlo Secchi and Alessandro Gili
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
Abstract:
In the aftermath of the pandemic, global demand for infrastructure is booming. National plans around the world show that infrastructure is likely to provide the backbone for a resurgence in public expenditure, and to support growth in economies badly hit by the pandemic. As all the biggest powers and blocs (the EU, the US, China, and Japan) have recently announced their plans for climate or carbon neutrality, the room and need for green and sustainable infrastucture are greatly expanding. Decarbonisation and digitalisation will be underpinning this latest investment drive in infrastructure, with sustainability and ESG principles at its core. However, infrastructure expenditure will not come without risk: after the pandemic, the world will be left with the highest levels of public and private debt since World War II, and the sustainability of key investment decisions must be carefully evaluated. How to foster quality and sustainable infrastructure investment? What role for the private sector? What future for sustainable mobility? What kind of policies will countries adopt to reach carbon neutrality?
Topic:
Infrastructure, Economy, Sustainability, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

159. Countering Global Kleptocracy: A New US Strategy for Fighting Authoritarian Corruption

Author:
Nate Sibley and Ben Judah
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
In the most comprehensive kleptocracy policy study yet published, Nate Sibley and Ben Judah examine the pervasive threat to democracy, prosperity and security posed by globalized corruption and offer 70 recommendations for US policymakers.
Topic:
Corruption, Authoritarianism, Criminal Justice, and Kleptocracy
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

160. Implementing Decision-Centric Warfare: Elevating Command and Control to Gain an Optionality Advantage

Author:
Bryan Clark, Dan Patt, and Timothy A. Walton
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
Since the Cold War ended, the US Department of Defense (DoD) has developed doctrine and capabilities predominantly for the most stressing campaigns it could face against opponents such as the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Russia, and North Korea. These worst-case scenarios are intended to ensure US forces can address “lesser-included” cases as well. This approach, however, favors concepts and systems designed for large-scale, high-intensity military conflict, and intelligent US adversaries are unlikely to present US forces with confrontations where DoD could leverage its strengths in missions such as power projection or precision strike. America’s rivals have evolved approaches during the past decade to circumvent US military strengths, such as PRC and Russian gray-zone or hybrid operations, that obtain objectives at lower cost and escalation—albeit over longer timeframes—than traditional military combat. DoD should therefore revise its planning to raise the priority of new scenarios that stress the US military in different ways than theater-wide high-intensity combat such as through protraction, varying levels of escalation and scale, and the use of proxy and paramilitary forces. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) concept of System Destruction Warfare and the Russian military’s New Generation Warfare are representative of the new approaches being employed against the United States and its allies. Although they are very different in their theory of victory and methodology, both concepts share a focus on information and decision-making as the main battlegrounds for future conflict. They direct attacks on an opponent’s battle network electronically and physically to degrade its ability to obtain accurate information while introducing false information that erodes the opponent’s ability to orient. Simultaneously, military and paramilitary forces would present dilemmas to the opponent by isolating or attacking targets in a manner that neutralized their combat potential and controlled the escalation of a conflict.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Science and Technology, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America