Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 3 Years

131. Is Doughnut Economics a Means Towards Achieving Planetary Health?

Author:
Jonathan Ramakrishna
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
With the advent of climate change, the global focus is no longer lingering alone on climate change mitigation and has shifted towards climate adaptation as well. The 2015 Paris Agreement’s target of restricting the average temperature rise in the 21st century to well below two degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels is increasing unlikely, given the inaction of states and the global lack of progress in meeting Paris Agreement goals. As nations scramble to meet Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and effectively design climate policies, the global crisis has given rise to a new domain, Planetary Health. Planetary Health, an interdisciplinary field, is described as a solutions-focused discipline which aims to analyse, mitigate, and resolve human disruption to Earth’s natural systems in the new Anthropocene epoch. The Anthropocene epoch, on the other hand, is established as a geological climate where human activity is drastically altering earth’s systems to an extent that will be reflected in fossil records. Planetary Health inextricably links human health to the health of the planet and illustrates the interdependency of the two, and this relationship has been substantiated by findings which concur that countries with higher ecological threats concurrently experience greater social vulnerability. When climate-induced disasters occur due to human action, there are subsequent consequences on food, water, energy, and human security. The consequences are disproportionately felt by vulnerable communities in states that lack resources and capabilities to address the consequent impacts on human security, and climate instability is a driving force behind political instability. Thus, there is cause for concern not only for the planet’s health but also for human health as the environment’s health continues to dwindle in the Anthropocene Epoch. As such, the concept of Planetary Health is a response to threatened climate security and human security.
Topic:
Economics, Health, International Cooperation, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

132. A Study on the Effects of Multinational Production on Global and Domestic Value Chains Following Trade Restructuring and Corresponding International Economic Policies

Author:
Myoung Shik Choi and Hun Dae Lee
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Emphasizing foreign affiliates amid stagnant global value-chained trade, this study provides important evidence for measurable policies which should be taken dependent on the level of GVCs integration in shaping international trade flows and multinational production activity. The recent decreased share of value-added exports within gross exports represents characteristics of a wider value chained network. It is common not only for firms to increase their economic activities globally but also for oversea affiliates to operate as the linchpin between the international and domestic parts of value chains. Our findings suggest that foreign affiliate activity strengthens domestic value chains, thereby leading to the outcome of further growth in the host country, while domestic affiliate activity abroad strengthens global value chains which spur growth in the broader world economy. Based on empirical discussions centered on participating in GVCs, OECD high-income countries significantly integrated into GVCs will benefit from upgrading their GVCs policies such as capturing value-added in exports and building new technology or innovation. There is also a need to continue enforcing the domestic linkages of MNE affiliates, which contributes to growth and employment as they contract and cooperate with domestic firms. In addition, low-income countries not fully integrated into GVCs in the Asia-Pacific region may need to secure entry into existing GVCs with trade liberalization, while middle-income countries which have secured entry into GVCs may focus on enhancing competitiveness by increasing productivity and developing regional economic integration through forums like APEC.
Topic:
Multinational Corporations, Economic Policy, Free Trade, Industry, and Value Chains
Political Geography:
Global Focus

133. Regulating the International Digital Economy, with Trade and Innovation in Mind

Author:
Douglas Lippoldt
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The international digital economy is growing rapidly, and the fragmented governance framework is struggling to keep pace. Global entities such as the World Trade Organization and regional trade agreements offer a patchwork approach to governance. This paper illustrates the importance of governance in relation to private-sector innovation and recommends next steps to enhance governance, close gaps and promote further innovation. Better definition and international alignment of the framework for governance of digital trade and data could lead to greater privacy, trust and security.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Regulation, Digital Economy, and Innovation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

134. A Future Built on Data: Data Strategies, Competitive Advantage and Trust

Author:
Susal Ariel Aarsonson
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
In the twenty-first century, data became the subject of national strategy. This paper examines these visions and strategies to better understand what policy makers hope to achieve. Data is different from other inputs: it is plentiful, easy to use and can be utilized and shared by many different people without being used up. Moreover, data can be simultaneously a commercial asset and a public good. Various types of data can be analyzed to create new products and services or to mitigate complex “wicked” problems that transcend generations and nations (a public good function). However, an economy built on data analysis also brings problems — firms and governments can manipulate or misuse personal data, and in so doing undermine human autonomy and human rights. Given the complicated nature of data and its various types (for example, personal, proprietary, public, and so on), a growing number of governments have decided to outline how they see data’s role in the economy and polity. While it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies, policy makers increasingly recognize that if they want to build their country’s future on data, they must also focus on trust.
Topic:
Economics, Governance, Data, and Competition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

135. Rudiments of a Space Security Policy Framework

Author:
Richard J. Chasdi
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The commercial space industry is taking off, with a growing number of private companies sending people into orbit. Along with this growth in demand from businesses and consumers is the need for more space security and policy approaches to address the potential risks of space exploration. The Moon is currently the main target of future space missions because of its resources and its strategic location to support missions to Mars. International law can help mitigate threats, such as resource depletion on the Moon, which could lead to conflicts among stakeholders on Earth.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Space, and Innovation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

136. A Digital Loonie among Many Digital Currencies: Prospects and Outlook

Author:
Pierre L. Siklos
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Global interest in digitalization is growing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and driving central banks to introduce retail central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). The successful rollout of retail CBDCs will depend on each country’s institutional capacity and the scope of international cooperation and regulation. Retail CBDCs are unlikely to replace domestic currencies but instead complement notes and coins in circulation, offering greater convenience and lower transactions costs.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, Digital Economy, Currency, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

137. To Prevent the Collapse of Biodiversity, the World Needs a New Planetary Politics

Author:
Stewart Patrick
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The planet is in the midst of an environmental emergency, and the world is only tinkering at the margins. Humanity’s addiction to fossil fuels and voracious appetite for natural resources are accelerating climate change and degrading ecosystems on land and sea, threatening the integrity of the biosphere and thus the survival of our own species. Given these risks, it is shocking that the multilateral system has failed to respond more forcefully. Belatedly, the United States, the EU, the UK, and some other advanced market democracies have adopted more aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets, but their ability to deliver is suspect, while critical emerging economies like China and India have resisted accelerating their own decarbonization.1 Even more concerning, existing multilateral commitments, including on climate change, fail to address the other half of the planet’s ecological crisis: collapsing biodiversity, which the leaders of the Group of 7 nations rightly call an “equally important existential threat.”
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Politics, Multilateralism, and Biodiversity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

138. Reducing Pernicious Polarization: A Comparative Historical Analysis of Depolarization

Author:
Jennifer McCoy, Benjamin Press, Murat Somer, and Ozlem Tuncel
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The global rise of political polarization has fueled concerns about its detrimental impact on politics and society. From an increase in political violence to a decrease in the quality of democracy and governance, the threats posed by pernicious polarization—the division of society into two mutually antagonistic political camps—are diverse and acute. Determining how to reduce these tensions is therefore an urgent challenge. Using data on political polarization from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data set, this working paper assesses various instances of depolarization around the globe since 1900 and analyzes their long-term sustainability. Polarization is increasing worldwide. When broken down by region, V-Dem data suggest that every region except Oceania has seen polarization levels rise since 2005. Africa has had the smallest increase during this period, although it has long had high levels of polarization. Rising polarization in Europe is being driven by deepening political divisions in Eastern and Central Europe, Southern Europe, and the Balkans. In the Western Hemisphere, the largest democracies—Brazil, Mexico, and the United States—are all experiencing extreme levels of polarization. East Asia’s polarization levels have traditionally been low, though increasing political tensions in places like South Korea and Taiwan are driving up the region’s score. And in South Asia, India’s polarization has skyrocketed since 2014. Jennifer McCoy Jennifer McCoy is a nonresident scholar in the Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, where she focuses on political polarization and democratic resilience in the U.S. and around the world. To better understand the various paths by which polarized societies might overcome or reduce their political divisions, this working paper examines perniciously polarized countries that have successfully depolarized, at least for a time. Through a quantitative analysis of the V-Dem data set, this study identifies 105 episodes from 1900 to 2020 where countries were able to reduce polarization from pernicious levels for at least five years. These 105 episodes represent roughly half of the total episodes of pernicious polarization during the time period, thus indicating a fairly robust capacity of countries to depolarize. If considered in terms of country experiences rather than episodes (because many countries have experienced multiple episodes in a cycle of polarization and depolarization), then the data indicate that two-thirds of the 178 countries for which V-Dem provides polarization data have experienced one or more episodes of pernicious polarization, but only thirty-five countries (20 percent) have failed to experience any depolarization to below-pernicious levels. Given this apparent capacity among the majority of the world’s countries to depolarize from pernicious levels at least some of the time, this analysis seeks to identify the contexts and sustainability of those experiences and to encourage further research into their causal mechanisms and outcomes for democracies. The analysis offers a preliminary discussion of the potential meaning and normative implications of depolarization as a concept and policy goal. It then uses qualitative analysis to identify patterns in the contexts of various depolarization cases and gauge the sustainability of these trends. Most of these depolarization episodes were associated with dramatic changes in a country’s political life. An analysis of contextual factors showed that almost three-quarters of the cases came after major systemic shocks: a foreign intervention, independence struggle, violent conflict, or regime change (primarily in a democratizing direction). In the remainder of cases, countries depolarized within a given regime structure, whether democratic or autocratic. Tellingly, the authors identified no cases of depolarization from pernicious levels among liberal democracies. This is because very few countries classified as full liberal democracies have ever reached pernicious levels; the United States stands out today as the only wealthy Western democracy with persistent levels of pernicious polarization. Just under half of all depolarizing cases were able to sustain depolarization for a decade or longer. In a second sizeable group of cases, countries managed polarization to some degree, either living with chronic near-pernicious levels after depolarizing, or else repolarizing to near-pernicious levels within ten years. Finally, 15 percent of the cases returned to pernicious levels within the first decade. Troublingly, when the authors analyzed the entire time period from 1900 to 2020, nearly half of the countries that had sustained depolarization or managed polarization for at least a decade later returned to pernicious levels of polarization. These outcomes illustrate the difficulty of sustaining low levels of polarization, and they indicate that a cyclical pattern of polarization, depolarization, and repolarization may be a characteristic feature of political life in many places. Only a fraction (14 percent) of cases resulted in sustained depolarization over the long term.The mechanisms and strategies that enable such sustained depolarization in democracies will be the subject of future research. But given the small number of democracies (eleven) able to accomplish this feat amid the larger pattern of cyclical polarization and depolarization, it will be crucial to also understand strategies of managing polarization at moderately high levels while avoiding democratic erosion, government dysfunction, or returns to pernicious polarization and potential violence.
Topic:
Politics, History, Polarization, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

139. Governance for Resilience: How Can States Prepare for the Next Crisis?

Author:
Frances Brown
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The pandemic has presented policymakers with daunting, interlinked, and often unprecedented challenges. From health emergencies that also upend economies to trade disruptions that also pose new multilateral diplomatic dilemmas, the pandemic has generated challenges that seem exceptional in both scale and degree of interconnection. Although the coronavirus pandemic has generated a dizzying series of harsh social, political, and economic firsts, such dilemmas will not be the last. Trend lines around a series of domestic and multinational governance issues, including climate change, migration, rising geopolitical tensions, and citizen alienation from governing institutions, suggest that complex, interlinked crises will be features of the future. While national and multilateral policymakers should work to alleviate the drivers of such crises, they must also strive to prepare their countries to adapt and recover from complex shocks. In short, they must try to build resilience. The need for resilience will be especially acute in developing and fragile states. These countries will need to respond to compounding shocks across multiple domains, without the head start that their developed-world counterparts enjoy. Equally, donors and policymakers from the Global North must also elevate resilience and adaptation as key components of their approaches to supporting fragile states. This call to bolster countries’ resilience is hardly new. Even before the pandemic, the policy arena featured increasing calls for resilience; now, the chorus has become almost deafening. Recent seminal policy and analytic documents—including the U.S. National Intelligence Council’s flagship report,1 the UK’s Integrated Review,2 and the U.S. Interim National Security Strategy3—have underscored that states’ resilience and capacity for adaptation will be key to their future success in the geopolitical arena. In donors’ peacebuilding and development policies, high-level emphasis on resilience has also swelled over the past few years, including in official communications from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,4 the United States government,5 and the European Union.6 In some development practitioner and civil society circles, the need for resilience is so frequently invoked that it sometimes borders on cliché.7 The increasingly ubiquitous recommendation to “bolster resilience” is valuable for at least two related reasons. First, it offers a more specific strategic objective than conversations around “state fragility” writ large, which have often been too broad to generate concrete policy responses. Second, recent, failed international statebuilding projects have underscored that state fragility is not to be “fixed”—instead, it is to be managed and mitigated.8 The emphasis on resilience thus marks a helpful shift away from maximalist policy framing and toward a more attainable one. But concrete insights on how developing or fragile countries actually achieve resilience are less clear and less common. Given the broad consensus that state fragility is deeply linked to governance, for many policymakers, good governance is central. To be sure, many other factors beyond governance—including demographic, geographic, military, and economic ones—affect a state’s resilience. But a country’s governance and political institutions generally undergird all other dynamics in determining how effectively that state can bounce back from setbacks. What exactly does the concept of “good governance for resilience” entail in practice? This paper surveys the evidence. Below, it reviews the governance-related characteristics and capabilities that affect a country’s resilience. For the purposes of this paper, resilience at the national level can be understood as a country’s capacity to respond to, adapt to, and grow from stresses and shocks.9 Resilience focuses on bolstering the overall performance of a system in the face of unpredictable and often interconnected hazards, making it different from risk management, which relates to specific hazards.10 A country’s resilience depends on the internal characteristics that allow for states and their institutions to navigate a variety of disruptions.11 An overarching insight from the evidence is that governance for resilience is complex and often multidirectional. Several characteristics, such as decentralization, have an ambiguous effect on resilience: they enable a country to withstand some setbacks but leave it more vulnerable in other ways. Still other characteristics—including whether a country is a democracy or an authoritarian political system—do not appear have a clear-cut effect on resilience. In contrast, a few governance “super-factors”—such as control of corruption, societal trust, and high quality political leadership—are exceptionally powerful in enabling a country to augment its resilience through multiple pathways. Finally, this paper considers the broader implications of governance for resilience as a policy agenda. The framing of bolstering countries’ resilience is a valuable one, but it also raises several vexing trade-offs and dilemmas. In particular, it prompts the question of whose resilience, in specific, it refers to, since resilience of state institutions does not always mean resilience of all parts of the population. Looking ahead, the policy refrain of “building resilience” in fragile and developing states, appealing though it is, should be refined to encompass these thorny realities.
Topic:
Governance, Crisis Management, Resilience, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

140. Understanding and Responding to Global Democratic Backsliding

Author:
Thomas Carothers and Benjamin Press
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Over the past two decades, democratic backsliding has become a defining trend in global politics. However, despite the extensive attention paid to the phenomenon, there is surprisingly little consensus about what is driving it. The most common explanations offered by analysts—ranging from the role of Russia and China and disruptive technologies to the rise of populism, the spread of political polarization, and democracies’ failure to deliver—fall short when tested across a wide range of cases. A more persuasive account of backsliding focuses on the central role of leader-driven antidemocratic political projects and the variety of mechanisms and motivations they entail. This paper identifies and analyzes three distinct types of backsliding efforts: grievance-fueled illiberalism, opportunistic authoritarianism, and entrenched-interest revanchism. In cases of grievance-fueled illiberalism, a political figure mobilizes a grievance, claims that the grievance is being perpetuated by the existing political system, and argues that it is necessary to dismantle democratic norms and institutions to redress the underlying wrongs. Opportunistic authoritarians, by contrast, come to power via conventional political appeals but later turn against democracy for the sake of personal political survival. In still other backsliding cases, entrenched interest groups—generally the military—that were displaced by a democratic transition use undemocratic means to reassert their claims to power. Although motivations and methods differ across backsliding efforts, a key commonality among them is their relentless focus on undermining countervailing governmental and nongovernmental institutions that are designed to keep them in check. As international democracy supporters continue to refine their strategies of responding to democratic backsliding, they must better differentiate between facilitating factors and core drivers. Such an approach will point to the need for a stronger focus on the nature of leader-driven antidemocratic projects, identifying ways to create significant disincentives for backsliding leaders, and bolstering crucial countervailing institutions. Moreover, they should deepen their differentiation of strategies to take account of the diverse motivations and methods among the three main patterns of backsliding. Only in this way will they build the needed analytic and practical capacity to meet the formidable challenge that democratic backsliding presents.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Democracy, Populism, and Democratic Backsliding
Political Geography:
Global Focus