Search

Begin New Search Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

12241. Implications of COVID-19 for Conflict in Africa

Author:
Charlotte Fiedler, Karina Mross, and Yonas Adeto
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected armed conflict and political violence within countries? Focusing on Africa, a continent with a particularly high number of ongoing conflicts, this policy brief analyses the immediate and long-term implications of the pandemic on conflict and reflects on its implications for international peacebuilding efforts. In the short term, conflict patterns on the continent are marked more by a continuation of previous trends than by a strong direct impact of COVID-19. Regarding armed confrontations, there was a rise in conflict intensity in some countries and one new war erupted in the Tigray region of Ethiopia in November 2020. As to lower-scale political violence, especially in the beginning of the pandemic, many states used excessive state violence against civilians when enforcing Corona measures. Perhaps more important than the immediate effect of the pandemic, the consequences of the pandemic are very likely to accelerate violent conflict in the medium to long term. This is firstly because the pandemic exacerbates structural weaknesses, including the sharpening of societal divisions, severe disruptions in the education sector and deteriorating socio-economic circumstances. Secondly, the pandemic has curtailed actors and institutions that might be able to reduce the risk of violent escalation. Trust in the state and security institutions has suffered in many countries due to dissatis-faction with the handling of the pandemic. Moreover, demo¬cratic processes are hampered by the postponement of elections and increasing levels of government repression. At the same time, international peace support is negatively affected by social distancing and further threatened by looming cuts of commitments in official development assistance. Bringing together both the short-term and longer-term effects of the pandemic on conflict clearly shows the risk that the pandemic poses to peace in Africa. It is therefore vital for the international community to: 1. Stay engaged and stay alert. If the international community continues to focus on handling the domestic consequences of the pandemic rather than international challenges, conflict will further increase in intensity and spread geographically. COVID-19 has already led to a reduction in international peace support, including peacebuilding initiatives and mediation. However, these instruments are vital to foster peace and prevent emerging and renewed conflict. 2. Invest in conflict prevention. The adverse effects of COVID-19 on economic, social and political structures can, and very likely will, provide the breeding ground for larger-scale conflicts, both in least developed countries (LDCs) and middle-income countries. Thus, conflict prevention must be taken seriously, including the strengthening of open and participatory (democratic) processes that enable societies to deal with societal conflicts peacefully. 3. Pay special attention to post-conflict countries. Many African countries have experienced large-scale civil wars in their history and continue to be LDCs struggling with societal tensions. The risk of renewed conflict in these places is particularly high.
Topic:
Development, Conflict, COVID-19, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Africa

12242. EU-China Engagement in Humanitarian Aid: Different Approaches, Shared Interests?

Author:
Ina Friesen and Leon Janauschek
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Protracted crises and frequent natural disasters have generated an unprecedented number of people in need of humanitarian assistance. The international community faces a great challenge in supporting these populations, as the gap between needs and available funding is growing. To close this resource gap, the European Union (EU) aims to step up its engagement with emerging donors, particularly China, to increase their level of funding. Although China has previously been reluctant to engage in the international humanitarian system, its response to the COVID-19 pandemic indicates a change in attitude. Over the past year, China has delivered hundreds of tonnes of personal protective equipment (PPE) to over 150 countries and dispatched medical teams abroad. It has also donated $100 million to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations (UN) and pledged to establish a global humanitarian response depot and hub in China in cooperation with the UN. Amidst increasing geopolitical tensions between China and the EU, China’s growing humanitarian engagement opens an opportunity for the EU to engage with China in the humanitarian sector. However, rather than framing China’s increased engagement in solely financial terms, the EU should develop a long-term strategy as to how to engage with China on humanitarian matters. A dialogue that takes both parties’ different approaches towards humanitarian aid into account and searches for common ground could open the door towards possible cooperation. This would not only help in narrowing the funding gap but carry the potential for greater coordination and consequently more effective assistance provision. China conceptualises humanitarian aid as a subcategory of development aid and provides the majority of its assistance bilaterally. Beijing’s state-centric approach to humanitarian assistance means in practice that it engages mostly in the aftermath of natural disasters rather than conflict settings. The EU, on the other hand, has a separate humanitarian aid policy that guides the allocation of funds and provides its humanitarian assistance through non-governmental organisations (NGOs), UN agencies and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). This Briefing Paper maps out the characteristics of Chinese humanitarian aid and outlines two areas on which the EU’s tentative steps towards a dialogue with China could focus. • Food security sector: Food insecurity is a key component in existing humanitarian needs, only exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Food assistance and nutrition are already a key area of engagement for the EU and China. The EU should advocate for China to scale up its contributions to global food security through the World Food Programme (WFP), with whom China has a good working relationship. This could be combined with a political dialogue on how to foster cooperation on food security assistance. • Anticipatory humanitarian aid: Disaster risk reduction, preparedness and response play an increasingly important role in global humanitarian aid. China has built up its most significant expertise in response to natural disasters. Enhancement of disaster risk reduction is one of the strategic priorities of the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) for 2020–2024. In light of both parties’ interest in anticipatory humanitarian aid, knowledge exchange in this area has the potential to open the door for future cooperation.
Topic:
International Relations, Humanitarian Aid, European Union, Food Security, and Engagement
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

12243. What is Social Finance? Definitions by Market Participants, the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, and Implications for Development Policy

Author:
Sören Hilbrich
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The market for social financial instruments is rapidly growing. The issuance of social bonds, for instance, reached $149.4 billion in 2020, showing an extraordinary growth of 720% compared to 2019 (ADB, 2021, p. 14). By providing capital for certain types of investments associated with positive social impacts, these instruments are intended to close funding gaps that hamper the realisation of social goals, as laid down, for instance, in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In addition, social finance might set incentives for enterprises to engage in more sustainable business models that would give them access to social financial instruments potentially associated with a lower cost of capital. However, the magnitude of the potential contribution to society of social finance is a matter of debate. This paper focuses on an important challenge for social finance that concerns the plurality of existing definitions of social investments. The paper provides an overview of the definitions followed by market participants, describes the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities as a potential standard in this context, and discusses implications for development policy.
Topic:
Development, Markets, European Union, Sustainability, Bonds, and Social Finance
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12244. SDG-Aligned Futures and the Governance of the Transformation to Sustainability: Reconsidering Governance Perspectives on the Futures We Aspire to

Author:
Ariel Macaspac Hernandez
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The (im)possibility of governance of the transformation to sustainability (T2S) is driven by how the related multiple transition processes as well as the various functional, institutional and bargaining interactions among relevant agents or stakeholders can be steered. Like other transformation processes, T2S is an immediate response to threats and risks behind structural changes. In addition, T2S is a “purposive new normal” because it seeks ways to achieve a new equilibrium whereby the system is able to effectively confront or prevent imminent threats and risks. At the same time, this paper claims that there can be more than one version of the new equilibrium for each state or society. This paper argues against the “ahistoricity” (Geschichtslosigkeit) approach of much of the literature on T2S and contends that each country has a distinct set of socio-political (e.g. quality of institutions) and economic resources (e.g. gross national income) available, depending on its current standing. The academic debate on transformation has re-emerged with intensity due to it increasingly being linked to the discourse on sustainability. One important thread of this transformation–sustainability nexus is the role of governance. While the academic literature on governing T2S can already build on decades of work, the debate on the three-fold interfacing of governance, transformation and sustainability still has major gaps to fill. This paper articulates an integrated approach in understanding the governance of T2S by bringing together perspectives from sociology, political science and economics (and their sub-disciplines) as puzzle parts. Connecting the different puzzle parts contributed by the different disciplines, this paper conceptualises the four types of resources needed to make governance conducive to T2S: vision, performance, social cohesion and resilience. The next step for this paper is to use these puzzle parts to form a framework to introduce three sets of scenarios of pathways for sustainable futures, the “SDG-aligned futures”. The three pathways leading to these SDG-aligned futures are political-transition-driven (or strong), societal-transition-driven (or cohesive) and economic-transition-driven (or efficient). The three scenarios for SDG-aligned futures serve on one hand as the basis for the contextualisation of transformation for a more strategic application of appropriate solutions by focussing on what governance structures, levels, processes and scales are conducive to T2S. At the same time, this approach resolves the “ahistoricity” dilemma in many concepts of T2S by highlighting that countries have different entry points when initiating T2S. The perspectives on the scenarios towards a sustainable future provide multiple entry points for each country by specifying the departing stage for a specific country that consists of a set of path dependencies resulting from the country’s (1) historical experience (e.g. colonialism) and (2) national discourse (e.g. debate on the sustainable energy transition). As countries utilise the potentials of their already existing governance structures and implement policy reforms that occur within existing institutional and politico–legal structures as well as through social upheavals and fundamental changes (hence, resilience is fundamental to T2S), these pathways are aligned by the Sustainable Development Goals, leading to coherent societal priorities and policy mixes.
Topic:
Governance, Sustainable Development Goals, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12245. Social Cohesion: A New Definition and a Proposal for its Measurement in Africa

Author:
Julia Leininger, Francesco Burchi, Charlotte Fiedler, Karina Mross, Daniel Nowack, Armin von Schiller, Christoph Sommer, Christoph Strupat, and Sebastian Ziaja
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Social cohesion is key for sustainable development. While social cohesion has suffered in many societies from the consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic, high levels of social cohesion have helped to overcome critical situations during the pandemic in other societies. As a consequence, protecting and strengthening social cohesion has become an increasingly central goal for most countries and the international community. Despite the strong interest in the topic, the questions of how to define social cohesion and make it an observable phenomenon through proper measurement are still contested, in both academia and policy circles. To date, no consistent, temporally and geographically spread-out data on the different elements of social cohesion exists that would allow for a global analysis of social cohesion. This rather fragmented picture of analytical approaches calls for a more universal definition and measurement of social cohesion. This paper aims to provide a narrow and measurable definition of social cohesion that travels across regions and countries. Conceptually, it proposes a definition of social cohesion that incorporates the core elements of existing and widely used definitions of social cohesion across disciplines (trust, identity, cooperation for the common good). Our contribution is to offer a definition of social cohesion that is broad enough to cover the essentials holding societies together while at the same time keeping it lean enough to analyse the causes and consequences of social cohesion, for instance the relationship between social cohesion and inequalities or political institutions. Methodologically, we propose an application of our concept to the African context. It is not only a first step towards a more global and inter-regional measurement of social cohesion, but also the basis for further knowledge-creation, the identification of patterns of social cohesion and the analysis of its causes and consequences. From a policy-oriented perspective, a more unified definition of the core elements of social cohesion and its measurement can inform policies that aim at protecting and fostering social cohesion. In development cooperation, it will help not only to build indicators for designing programme objectives and for evaluation and monitoring, but also to advance evidence-based theories of change.
Topic:
Development, Sustainability, Social Cohesion, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Africa

12246. Does COVID-19 Change the Long-Term Prospects of Latecomer Industrialisation?

Author:
Tilman Altenburg, Clara Brandi, Anna Pegels, Andreas Stamm, Christiaan Vrolijk, and Tina Zintl
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This study explores to what extent the COVID-19 crisis affects the long-term prospects for industrial development. The focus of the study is on latecomer economies – those facing an uphill battle because they joined global markets at a point in time when other economies had already established global production networks. In a first step, we analyse how the prospects for industrialisation are changing, mainly as a consequence of three global megatrends: digitalisation and automation of production; global economic power shifts; and the greening of economies. These trends create new opportunities for latecomer industrialisation, but they also raise entry barriers to markets, especially for country with weak innovation systems. We then explore COVID-19 effects through the analytical lens of the pre-COVID megatrends. While the pandemic has had a severe impact on the world economy, such impacts will not change the ongoing trends fundamentally. The ongoing recovery from COVID-19 is not showing much structural transformation – despite many voices demanding to “build back better”. Yet, the pandemic is accelerating or decelerating some of the previous trends. One is the trend towards online trading. The dominance of international trading platforms may lead to concentration in “upstream” activities such as manufacturing, crowding out weaker market actors. At the same time, platform economies are boosting delivery activities, such as courier services. Another trend that may be accelerated by the pandemic is towards the reshoring of previously offshored productive tasks, yet, evidence here is mixed, and we may see other risk-hedging strategies rather than large-scale reshoring. We may also see the gap between dynamic economies in East/Southeast Asia and other developing regions widening, because the former recovered faster due to vaccination programmes and fiscal stimulus packages. Regarding the greening of economies, some major economies initiated green fiscal stimulus packages, accelerating for example the development of global green hydrogen economy. Also, the trend towards tele-work is reducing emissions from the transport sector. Overall, however, the pandemic does not seem to alter the ongoing, but slow, progress towards greener economies. We conclude with police recommendations in five domains: i) Fostering economic resilience through economic diversification; ii) the need to develop pharmaceutical and medical supply industries in all countries; iii) increased investments in digital capabilities, including the ability to regulate platform economies; iv) strengthening domestic revenue generation to increase policy space and resilience, including pro-environmental fiscal reforms; and v) improving international governance e.g. in the domains of intellectual property rights and technology-sharing.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Governance, Industrialization, Resilience, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12247. The Preserving Effect of Social Protection on Social Cohesion in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Author:
Christoph Strupat
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This paper examines empirically whether social protection in the form of adapted social assistance programmes are affecting social cohesion during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using unique primary data from nationally representative, in-person surveys from Kenya allows for the exploration of the effect of social protection on attributes of social cohesion (trust, cooperation and identity). The analysis employs a difference-in-differences approach that compares households with and without social assistance coverage before and after the first wave of the pandemic. The findings suggest that social assistance can have a positive effect on attributes of social cohesion, but only in regions that faced larger restrictions due to lockdown policies. Turning to the analysis without focusing on lockdown regions, social assistance does not affect attributes of social cohesion. Overall, the results suggest that only under specific circumstances existing national social assistance programmes and their adaptation in times of large covariate shocks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, can be beneficial for social cohesion.
Topic:
Social Cohesion, COVID-19, Trust, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Kenya and Africa

12248. How the Political Participation of Refugees is Shaped on the Local Level: Self-Organisation and Political Opportunities in Cologne

Author:
Milan Jacobi
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Six years have passed since the so-called “long summer of migration” of 2015, and the numbers of newly arriving asylum-seekers in Germany have flattened. However, as one of the main receiving countries of refugees, other challenges are coming into focus. Besides labour market participation and cultural participation, political participation is crucial to social life. But how to enable the political participation of refugees in host countries remains a challenge. This study examines how refugees without the condition of citizenship, who, thus, lack formal, electoral means of participation, can engage in political activities. To this end, it first uses a qualitative approach to examine how various self-organisations in the city of Cologne, Germany, use their resources to bring their interests into the political decision-making process. Second, it examines the political opportunity structures that exist at the local level to enable refugee self-organisations (RSOs) to engage in political activities. For this purpose, interviews were conducted with representatives of the organisations as well as the municipality and other civil society actors in Cologne. The results show that RSOs can be important partners for municipal decision-makers when it comes to refugee-specific issues. However, the results also suggest that opportunity structures are unevenly distributed among organisations and affect the organisations’ resource endowments, thus limiting access.
Topic:
Migration, Refugees, and Political Participation
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

12249. Global Access to COVID-19 Vaccines: Challenges in Production, Affordability, Distribution and Utilisation

Author:
Andreas Stamm, Christoph Strupat, and Anna-Katharina Hornidge
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing vaccination process calls for decisive, internationally coordinated and forward-looking action. We propose short-, medium- and long-term actions and emphasise that the political pressure for action should not only focus on short-term management, but on building long-term structures that are crucial to prepare for future epidemics or pandemics. Four key challenges need to be addressed in order to achieve global control of COVID-19 by using vaccines. First, vaccines need to be produced at scale; second, they should be priced affordably; third, they have to be allocated globally so that they are available where needed; and fourth, they have to be deployed and utilised in local communities. Challenges in production are producing some of the main bottlenecks, but the others – in particular vaccine scepticism and utilisation – need to be considered early enough to enable smooth global vaccination campaigns. Addressing the four key challenges, we recommend the following short, medium- and long-term actions. In the short term, we advise accelerating global vaccination efforts by scaling up financial support for the COVAX initiative. In the medium term, we suggest establishing regional production centres in priority countries, providing the necessary intellectual property through voluntary patent pools and fostering information campaigns and civil society participation to increase vaccination willingness and utilisation. In the long term, we recommend establishing Global Pandemic Centres of Excellence in all world regions – analogous to the CGIAR system in the agricultural sector – that are responsible for medical research, vaccine production, distribution and delivery.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Vaccine, COVID-19, and Coordination
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12250. The EU-UNDP Partnership and Added Value in EU Development Cooperation

Author:
Erik Lundsgaarde
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
European Union (EU) funding for United Nations (UN) organisations has expanded significantly over the last two decades. The EU’s partnership with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is an important example of EU-UN cooperation, and UNDP was the fourth-largest UN recipient of European Commission funds in 2018. Against the backdrop of UN and EU reforms that aim to strengthen multilateralism and promote more integrated development cooperation approaches, this paper outlines priority areas in EU-UNDP cooperation and modes of cooperation. The term “added value” provides an entry point for identifying the rationales for EU funding to UNDP. In EU budgetary discussions, added value is a concept used to inform decisions such as whether to take action at the EU or member state levels or which means of implementation to select. These choices extend to the development cooperation arena, where the term relates to the division of labour agenda and features in assessments of effectiveness. The paper explores three perspectives to consider the added value of funding choices within the EU-UNDP partnership relating to the division of labour between EU institutions and member states, the characteristics of UNDP as an implementation channel and the qualities of the EU as a funder. On the first dimension, the large scale of EU funding for UNDP sets it apart from most member states, though EU funding priorities display elements of specialisation as well as similar emphases to member states. On the second dimension, UNDP’s large scope of work, its implementation capacities and accountability standards are attractive to the EU, but additional criteria – including organisational cost effectiveness – can alter the perception of added value. Finally, the scale of EU funding and the possibility to engage in difficult country contexts are key elements of the added value of the EU as a funder. However, the EU’s non-core funding emphasis presents a challenge for the UN resource mobilisation agenda calling for greater flexibility in organisational funding. Attention to these multiple dimensions of added value can inform future EU choices on how to orient engagement with UNDP to reinforce strengths of the organisation and enable adaptations envisaged in UN reform processes.
Topic:
Development, United Nations, Reform, European Union, Partnerships, and Funding
Political Geography:
Global Focus