Search

You searched for: Publishing Institution German Development Institute (DIE) Remove constraint Publishing Institution: German Development Institute (DIE) Political Geography Global Focus Remove constraint Political Geography: Global Focus Publication Year within 5 Years Remove constraint Publication Year: within 5 Years Publication Year within 1 Year Remove constraint Publication Year: within 1 Year
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Daniel Nowack, Sophia Schoderer
  • Publication Date: 01-2020
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Shared values are deemed necessary as a solid foundation for social cohesion by commentators and observers in many countries. However, when examining what kind of values this is based on, answers often come down to platitudes and national clichés. This discussion paper offers some clarification through both a theoretical explication and an empirical exploration concerning the general role of values for social cohesion. Values are notions about desirable, trans-situational end-states and behaviours. They fall into two categories, individual and societal values. We provide a critical discussion of the most prominent conceptualisations and their operationalisation in the social sciences. Values affect social cohesion in three possible pathways: First, when they are shared; second, when they promote behaviour per se conducive to social cohesion and third, through their effect on policy choice and institutional design. We review evidence provided by the research literature for each of these pathways. We further explore the third pathway by deriving from the research literature the conjecture that a cultural value emphasis on egalitarianism makes a universalistic scope of welfare institutions more likely, which in turn increases social and political trust. We first examine this conjecture with a series of regression models, and then run a mediation analysis. The results show that (1.) egalitarian values are moderately strongly and positively linked to universalistic welfare institutions, but that (2.) welfare institutions mediate the association of egalitarian values with social trust only to a small extent and that (3.) more universalistic welfare institutions counteract a negative association between egalitarian values and institutional trust.
  • Topic: Culture, Institutions, Values, Welfare, Social Cohesion
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Francesco Burchi, Christoph Strupat, Armin von Schiller
  • Publication Date: 01-2020
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Social cohesion is an important precondition for peaceful and economically successful societies. The question of how societies hold together and which policies enhance social cohesion has become a relevant topic on both national and international agendas. This Briefing Paper stresses the contribution of revenue collection and social policies, and in particular the interlinkages between the two. It is evident that revenue mobilisation and social policies are intrinsically intertwined. It is impossible to think carefully about either independently of the other. In particular, revenue is needed to finance more ambitious social policies and allow countries to reach goals, such as those included in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Similarly, better social policies can increase the acceptance of higher taxes and fees. Furthermore, and often underestimated, a better understanding of the interlinkages between revenue generation and social policies can provide a significant contribution to strengthening social cohesion – in particular, concerning state–citizen relationships. In order to shed light on these interlinkages, it is useful to have a closer look at the concept of the “fiscal contract”, which is based on the core idea that governments exchange public services for revenue. Fiscal contracts can be characterised along two dimensions: (i) level of endorsement, that is, the number of actors and groups that at least accept, and ideally proactively support, the fiscal contract, and (ii) level of involvement, that is, the share of the population that is involved as taxpayer, as beneficiary of social policies or both. In many developing countries, either because of incapacity or biased state action towards elite groups, the level of involvement is rather low. Given the common perception that policies are unjust and inefficient, in many developing countries the level of endorsement is also low. It is precisely in these contexts that interventions on either side of the public budget are crucial and can have a significant societal effect beyond the fiscal realm. We argue that development programmes need to be especially aware of the potential impacts (negative and positive) that work on revenue collection and social policies can have on the fiscal contract and beyond, and we call on donors and policy-makers alike to recognise these areas as relevant for social cohesion. We specifically identify three key mechanisms connecting social policies and revenue collection through which policy-makers could strengthen the fiscal contract and, thereby, enhance social cohesion: 1. Increasing the effectiveness and/or coverage of public social policies. These interventions could improve the perceptions that people – and not only the direct beneficiaries – have of the state, raising their willingness to pay taxes and, with that, improving revenues. 2. Broadening the tax base. This is likely to generate new revenue that can finance new policies, but more importantly it will increase the level of involvement, which will have other effects, such as increasing government responsiveness and accountability in the use of public resources. 3. Enhancing transparency. This can stimulate public debate and affect people’s perceptions of the fiscal system. In order to obtain this result, government campaigns aimed at diffusing information about the main features of policies realised are particularly useful, as are interventions to improve the monitoring and evaluation system.
  • Topic: Development, Finance, Economic growth, Tax Systems, Transparency, Social Cohesion
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Lennart C. Kaplan, Sascha Kuhn, Jana Kuhnt
  • Publication Date: 01-2020
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Successful programmes and policies require supportive behaviour from their targeted populations. Understanding what drives human reactions is crucial for the design and implementation of development programmes. Research has shown that people are not rational agents and that providing them with financial or material incentives is often not enough to foster long-term behavioural change. For this reason, the consideration of behavioural aspects that influence an individual’s actions, including the local context, has moved into the focus of development programmes. Disregarding these factors endangers the success of programmes. The World Bank brought this point forward forcefully with its 2015 World Development Report, “Mind, Society and Behavior”, herewith supporting the focus on behavioural insights within development policies. While agencies may intuitively consider behavioural aspects during programme design and implementation, a systematic approach would improve programme effectiveness at a relatively small financial cost. For this reason, we present a framework – the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) – that aids practitioners and researchers alike in considering important determinants of human behaviour during the design and implementation of development programmes The TPB suggests considering important determinants of human behaviour, such as the individual’s attitude towards the intervention (influenced by previous knowledge, information or learning); subjective norms (influenced by important people, such as family members or superiors); and the individual’s sense of behavioural control (influenced by a subjective assessment of barriers and enablers). The theory should be used early on in the programme design to perform a structured assessment of behavioural aspects in the appropriate context. Components of the TPB can often be addressed through cost-effective, easy changes to existing programmes. Simple guiding questions (see Box 1) can help integrate the theory into the programme design. An iterative and inclusive process, particularly in exchange with the targeted population and other stakeholders, increases success.
  • Topic: Development, Norms, Behavior
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Francesco Burchi, Daniele Malerba, Nicole Rippin, Claudio E. Montenegro
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: The 2030 Agenda has provided new impetus to two facets of the struggle for poverty alleviation, which is a central goal of the international development community. First, poverty is no longer viewed strictly in monetary terms, but rather as a multidimensional phenomenon. Second, the need to reduce poverty for different social groups and not just at the aggregate, national level is explicitly recognised. Against this background, this paper has three objectives: (1) to analyse the trends in multidimensional poverty in low- and middle-income countries, (2) to explore rural-urban differences in poverty over time, and (3) to assess the validity of the claim that there has been a feminisation of poverty. The analysis relies on a new indicator of multidimensional poverty, the Global Correlation Sensitive Poverty Index (G-CSPI), that incorporates three key components: education, employment and health. The G-CSPI has several methodological advantages over existing measures, including that it is an individual rather than a household-level measure of poverty, which is crucial for gender-disaggregated analysis. Regarding aggregate trends, this paper shows that both income poverty and multidimensional poverty fell between 2000 and 2012. However, the decline in (extreme) income poverty in percentage terms was twice as large as the decline in multidimensional poverty. There is significant heterogeneity in the results across regions. Multidimensional poverty declined the most in Asia, converging towards the relatively low levels of Latin America and Europe, while sub-Saharan Africa’s slow progress further distanced it from other regions. These findings point to the existence of poverty traps and indicate that more efforts are needed to eradicate poverty. Regarding the urban-rural comparison, our analysis shows that poverty is predominantly a rural phenomenon: the rural G-CSPI was more than four times the urban G-CSPI. This difference remained nearly constant over time. As for the third objective, we find no gender bias in 2000 at the global level. This contrasts with the claim made in 1995 in Beijing that 70 per cent of the poor were women. However, we find that multidimensional poverty declined more among men (-18.5 per cent from 2000) than women (-15 per cent), indicating a process of feminisation of poverty. This was triggered by the decline in employment poverty, which was much slower among women. As most existing studies conclude that there was no evidence of the feminisation of poverty, this finding is new to the literature.
  • Topic: Gender Issues, Poverty, Inequality, Urban, Rural
  • Political Geography: Africa, Europe, Latin America, Global Focus
  • Author: Victoria Gonsior, Stephan Klingebiel
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: This paper uses the development policy system as an entry point assuming that various fundamental changes along three dimensions – narratives (why?), strategies (what?) and operational approaches (how?) – can be observed over recent years. Changes are diverse, ranging from new narratives translated to the development policy context (such as the migration narrative) to strategic considerations (for instance, developing countries’ graduation implications), new instruments (in form of development finance at the interface with the private sector), and concepts for project implementation (including frontier technology). We discuss the implications and effects of these trends in terms of holistic changes to the wider development policy system itself. Do these changes go hand-in-hand with and ultimately build on and re-inform each other? Or are we actually observing a disconnect between the narratives that frame the engagement of actors in development policy, their strategies for delivery, and operational approaches in partner countries? Based on a consultation of the appropriate literature and information gathered during a number of expert interviews and brainstorming sessions, this paper sheds light on these questions by exploring current trends and by highlighting continuing disconnections between the “why”, “what” and “how” in the development policy system. Further, we argue that the importance of such disconnections is increasing. In particular, the persistent or even increasing disconnections in the development policy system can be more problematic in the face of a universal agenda and the need to upscale delivery to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
  • Topic: Development, Science and Technology, United Nations, Sustainable Development Goals, Public Policy
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Jana Kuhnt
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Why do people leave their homes? This seemingly easy question requires a more complex answer. What ultimately prompts a person to leave if it is impossible to find a job due to a conflict that has destroyed all economic opportunities? Evidence suggests that the migration decision is a complex process that is dependent on a multitude of factors, such as migration governance regimes, migration and smuggler networks, access to technology, or individual characteristics such as age, gender and educational background. I use a theoretical framework to present the variety of determinants that have been put forward as influencing migration decisions at the macro-, meso-, and micro-level. This structured overview discusses their importance for different forms of migration and subsequently helps to identify gaps for further research.
  • Topic: Migration, Immigration, Refugees, Economic Development
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Anita Breuer, Julia Leininger, Jale Tosun
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Implementing the 2030 Agenda in an integrated way poses new challenges to political institutions and processes. In order to exploit synergies and to mitigate trade-offs between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), innovative governance approaches are needed. National bodies to coordinate SDG implementation were being created as of late 2015. As a basis for future analyses on effectiveness, it is important to know if, and which, institutional designs are in place to implement the SDGs and why they were chosen. Against this background, this Discussion Paper analyses how political factors influence institutional design choices when it comes to implementing the SDGs. The aim of this paper is twofold: First, it seeks to assess governments’ proposals for institutional designs for SDG implementation at the national level and to identify patterns of institutional designs. It does so by analysing and coding the Voluntary National Reviews from 2016 and 2017 of 62 signatory states, including OECD and none-OECD countries from all world regions and income groups. Second, it aims to explain which political and socio-economic factors shaped these institutional designs. The empirical analysis shows that the majority of countries have opted for a design that promotes political support at the highest level and cross-sectoral, horizontal integration, but has significant shortcomings in terms of social inclusiveness and vertical coordination across different levels of government. When asking which determinants shape these patterns, our findings reveal that horizontal integration becomes more likely with higher socio-economic development. Moreover, we find that vertical integration and societal integration are interdependent and mutually enforcing. Based on our findings, we formulate policy recommendations regarding the institutional requirements for integrated SDG implementation.
  • Topic: Development, Sustainable Development Goals, Institutions
  • Political Geography: Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Elke Herrfahrdt-Pähle, Waltina Scheumann, Annabelle Houdret, Ines Dombrowsky
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Water is essential for all life on earth and is a key prerequisite for attaining many of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Many countries, however, suffer from physical water scarcity, a lack of access to a safe water supply and sanitation, water pollution or hydrological extremes (droughts and floods) due to climate change. The generality and severity of water problems lead many to speak of a global water crisis. While this crisis mostly manifests at the local or in some cases transboundary level, two global issues are often overlooked. First, global trends such as climate change and the spread of water-intensive consumption and trade patterns are key triggers that cannot be addressed at the local level alone. Second, the aggregation of local or regional water problems may add up to a universal threat to sustainable development. In the face of current challenges, (fresh) water should be conceptualised as a global common good, and global water governance should contribute to improving its protection. This study reveals that the current global water governance architecture is a highly fragmented and incoherent regime consisting of numerous norms, paradigms and actors, each covering single aspects of global water governance. Given the diversity of issues, a “classical” formation of one comprehensive international water regime in the form of a framework convention, and equipped with a specific global governance institution (such as for climate stability, biological diversity or the prevention of desertification) has so far not emerged. The authors suggest a global water governance regime that could evolve from the improved interplay of the existing elements of global water governance (i.e. norms, targets, paradigms and actors). This could be complemented by two innovations at UN level: installing an Intergovernmental Body on Water allowing for mandated decisions on water in the UN system, and a Scientific and Practice Panel on Water improving the science-policy interface. Such an approach that combines global norms and joint guidelines to be adapted to local contexts and needs may be able to increase urgently needed political support for governing water as a global commons, beyond the nation-state interests and their perception of water resources as sovereign goods.
  • Topic: Environment, Water, Governance, Sustainable Development Goals
  • Political Geography: Europe, Germany, Global Focus
  • Author: Mariya Aleksandrova
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Special Report
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: This discussion paper aims to further awareness of opportunities to address loss and damage caused by climate change-related slow onset events (SOEs) through social protection. The analysis is based on a review of interdisciplinary theoretical and empirical literature. The findings suggest that designing comprehensive, climate-responsive social protection strategies can strongly support proactive measures to avoid, minimise and address the complex, long-term impacts of SOEs on human health, livelihoods, poverty and inequality. This entails improving the effectiveness and extending the coverage of existing social protection systems; mainstreaming climate concerns, including risks associated with SOEs, into national social protection frameworks; integrating social protection with broader climate and development policies and strategies; and developing innovative and transformational approaches to social protection. To this end, several issues for research and policy are discussed. Overall, the paper attempts to set the groundwork for an advanced research and policy agenda on social protection and climate change as well as emphasise the need for wider consideration of social protection in global climate change debates. In addition, the study aims to inform the future work of the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts in the working areas of SOEs and comprehensive risk management approaches.
  • Topic: Climate Change, Health, Poverty, Inequality, Social Services
  • Political Geography: Global Focus
  • Author: Charlotte Fiedler, Karina Mross
  • Publication Date: 01-2019
  • Content Type: Policy Brief
  • Institution: German Development Institute (DIE)
  • Abstract: Societies that have experienced violent conflict face considerable challenges in building sustainable peace. One crucial question they need to address is how to deal with their violent past and atrocities that were committed – for example, whether perpetrators should be held accountable by judicial means, or whether the focus should be laid on truth telling and the compensation of victims. Transitional justice (TJ) offers a range of instruments that aim to help societies come to terms with their history of violent conflict. Systematic, empirical analyses of TJ instruments have been emerging over the last years. This Briefing Paper summarises the policy-relevant insights they provide regarding the main TJ instruments: trials; truth commissions; reparations for victims; and amnesties.
  • Topic: Conflict Resolution, Transitional Justice, Political Science, Peace, Justice
  • Political Geography: Colombia, Germany, Global Focus