Search

Begin New Search Political Geography United States of America Publication Year within 3 Years

1511. Smooth sailing? Australia, New Zealand and the United States partnering in–and with–the Pacific islands

Author:
Joanne Wallis and Anna Powles
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
Australia, New Zealand and the United States should help create an ASEAN-style forum for Pacific island nations to discuss security and manage geopolitical challenges. The call for a dialogue, modelled on the ASEAN regional forum, is one of several recommendations to improve security partnerships and coordination in the region, reducing the risk that the three countries trip over one another and lose sight of the Pacific’s own priorities as they deepen their Pacific ties out of strategic necessity amid China’s growing interest. While focussing on those three countries, this report stresses that wider partnerships should be considered, including with France, India, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom and European Union. The report states that the three countries will have to get used to greater Chinese involvement in the Pacific, even if they don’t accept it, much less like it.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Alliance, ASEAN, AUKUS, and ANZUS
Political Geography:
Australia, New Zealand, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

1512. Impactful mateship: Strengthening the US–Australia defence relationship through enhanced mutual understanding

Author:
Alan W. Throop
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
AUKUS, and the Australian Government’s release of the 2023 report of the Defence Strategic Review (DSR), reinforce to Canberra and Washington DC that there’s an urgent need to continue strengthening the US–Australia alliance. Those efforts underpin allied cooperation within the Indo-Pacific, which is an increasingly complex security environment. This report highlights 9 opportunities for both US and Australian defence decision-makers at a vital time in the relationship as it develops in complexity and builds towards the ambitions of AUKUS over the coming decade. A series of ‘quick wins’ for the US DoD are recommended, including arranging more training for inbound DoD personnel and conducting allied-centric training for relevant US-based action officers and planners at US headquarters. US DoD Funding should be provided for US action officers to visit Australia to build rapport with their counterparts and facilitate appreciation for the relationship in person. Broadly, US professional military education at every level should incorporate Australian Defence-centric views when appropriate, and the DoD can better leverage its US liaison network throughout Australia earlier in planning and when considering new initiatives. Recommended quick wins for Australian Defence to include further leveraging of US-based Australian Defence personnel and encouraging greater transparency with US counterparts regarding capacity. Enhanced transparency would provide maximum clarity on capacity challenges at all echelons, especially regarding the potential impacts of a future crisis within the Indo-Pacific. It’s also recommended that Australian Defence provide greater clarity regarding sovereignty and security concerns for the US DoD. Finally, this report also makes a major long-term recommendation that will require more resourcing, coordination and focus from US and Australian defence decision-makers, and that’s to establish and empower a US Forces Australia headquarters (USFOR-A) to synergise US DoD efforts with the Australian defence establishment. It’s inevitable that the US–Australia defence relationship will grow in scope and complexity. That will quickly outgrow and challenge the current coordination structure, which was built and implemented decades ago. This report also notes that there are lessons to be learned from the US–Japan bilateral coordination mechanisms, especially in the light of the US–Japan–Australia defence relationship, as it is set to grow in importance in the coming years.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Alliance, and AUKUS
Political Geography:
Australia, Australia/Pacific, and United States of America

1513. The Persistent Consequences of the Energy Transition in Appalachia’s Coal Country

Author:
Eleanor Krause
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The persistence and intensification of earnings, employment, and opportunity gaps across place has become an increasingly salient feature of the United States economy over the past several decades.1 This economic divergence has occurred alongside a remarkable transition away from coal-fired electricity that is expected to continue as lower-carbon energy sources become more economically viable. While essential to minimizing the damages of climate change, the shift poses significant challenges to the relatively rural and distressed communities traditionally reliant on this resource. Indeed, many historically coal-dependent communities in Central Appalachia have long been characterized by deep poverty, limited employment opportunities, and high rates of public assistance, and recurrent adverse shocks to coal employment over the past several decades have amplified many of these qualities, potentially elevating the risks associated with the energy and economic shifts ahead. How have Appalachia’s coal-dependent communities adjusted to historical and contemporary declines in demand for coal, and how do these shocks – and their consequences for the educational composition of affected communities – influence the capacity for future generations to adapt to new challenges? In this policy brief, I present estimates of how Appalachia’s coal country has adjusted to recent declines in coal mining employment (“coal shocks”), and I demonstrate how this adjustment process is, in part, dictated by the persistent consequences of historical employment shocks in Appalachia. The evidence suggests that recent coal shocks (i.e., declines in coal employment occurring between 2007 and 2017) have been relatively painful for affected communities, causing large reductions in local population sizes, declines in local employment counts, declines in earnings, and increases in the rate of government transfer receipt. All of these adjustment costs are more severe in counties with a history of “selective migration” induced by shifting employment opportunities in the 1980s. That is, the estimated effect of recent coal shocks on population sizes, employment, earnings, and transfer payments is significantly larger in counties that lost greater numbers of their college-educated adults in the 1980s thanks to historical employment shocks in proximate labor markets. The upshot is that coal-dependent communities may demonstrate little resilience to recent coal shocks in part because of the persistent consequences of historical shocks, which fundamentally altered the educational composition of affected communities. By dramatically reducing the number of college-educated individuals living in a community, adverse shocks have the capacity to put places on a pathway of decline that makes it more difficult to adapt to economic shifts in subsequent generations. These insights preview the potentially damaging implications of future contractions in the coal industry, revealing the need for greater empirical investigation of the types of policy efforts that might ameliorate the painful local adjustment costs associated with the energy transition going forward.
Topic:
Climate Change, Employment, Coal, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
North America, United States of America, and Appalachia

1514. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations and Policy Considerations in the United States

Author:
Sarah Hubbard
Publication Date:
05-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) can be defined as global, digitally-native organizations which enable people to coordinate and govern shared resources and activities through the use of smart contracts on blockchains. The explosive growth of DAOs since 2020 has led to experimentation, speculation, and investment in this emerging organizational framework. There are an estimated 6,000 DAOs as of June 2022, with participation from contributors around the world and an aggregate treasury value of an estimated $25 billion. While the web3 space has been marred by scams and bad actors, there are legitimate use cases for DAOs. Early applications include focuses on fractionalized ownership and control, incentive alignment, resilient operations, and collective action. DAOs demonstrate innovative potential and are producing new forms of tax revenue and employment for the U.S. States have taken various approaches towards legislation, including establishing a DAO LLC. The U.S. government needs a comprehensive strategy for addressing DAOs as novel organizational structures to retain domestic innovation and protect consumers. Future policy solutions should consider the following: DAOs have technical and operational uniqueness that should be taken into account by legislators and regulators. The United States must provide legal clarity to retain domestic innovation. The friction of existing organizational formation should be reduced and adapted. A multi-pronged approach is needed across the federal-level, state-level, and industry self-governance practices. This report aims to serve as an accessible primer for United States policymakers to understand the unique opportunities and challenges DAOs present, and how these organizations may be addressed in the regulatory landscape of the U.S. The first section of this report establishes the societal context in which DAOs have emerged, with an emphasis on the trends in organizational frameworks and working conditions to which DAOs respond. The second section describes the underlying technical and structural components that DAOs are built upon. The third section outlines the key purposes and applications of DAOs and shares findings from case studies and semi-structured interviews with 12 DAOs and 20 DAO contributors. The final section provides an overview of existing legislation and concludes by outlining directional considerations for policymakers.
Topic:
Decentralization, Autonomy, and Cyberspace
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

1515. The Science of Rapid Climate Change in Alaska and the Arctic: Sea Ice, Land Ice, and Sea Level

Author:
John P. Holdren
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The Earth’s surface north of the Arctic Circle, which includes nearly a third of Alaska, is warming 3-4 times faster than the global average.1 Alaska as a whole is warming twice as fast as the lower 48 states.2 As is true for most of the manifestations of anthropogenic climate change, moreover, the extremes of temperature are growing faster than the averages: the highest-ever temperature north of the Arctic Circle—100.4°F—was recorded in Verkhoyansk, Siberia, in June 2020;3 Anchorage reached an all-time high of 90°F on July 4, 2019;4 and Utqiavgik, Alaska, the northernmost U.S. city, reached an all-time winter high of 40°F in December 2022.5 The reasons warming is so fast in the Far North are quite well understood scientifically. The most important factor is the ice-snow-albedo feedback, in which warming reduces the area of land and water covered by ice and snow, which means less reflectivity and more absorption of incident solar energy at the surface, hence further warming.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Carbon Emissions, and Sea Ice
Political Geography:
North America, Alaska, Arctic, and United States of America

1516. China's response to the US tech war: The closing of detours

Author:
Yang Jiang
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS)
Abstract:
In the US-China rivalry, no battle is currently more fierce than the one over technology, with both countries ramping up efforts to pursue global technological leadership. The tech war has intensified under President Joe Biden, with the US’s strangling of China’s technological bottleneck getting tighter and tighter. The US’s stated aims are protecting its national security and foreign policy interests and preventing sensitive technologies with military applications from being acquired by China. Some analysts point to Beijing’s Made in China 2025 as the trigger of the tech war because that is China’s plan to upgrade manufacturing and seek the top positions in global value chains. The US is pursuing a strategy to outcompete and outmanoeuvre China, as is stated in the Biden administration’s National Security Strategy in October 2022: “this decade will be decisive, in setting the terms of our [the US’s] competition with the PRC”. Especially in the sector of semiconductors or chips, where the West controls China’s access to the most advanced technology, US restrictions and its ability to bring its allies into line have been destructive to China’s development. On 21 May 2023, Beijing’s ban of American chipmaker Micron from critical information infrastructure in China signals a first direct retaliation from Beijing. China has also realised that some of its hitherto measures—turning to alternative sources of import, utilising policy loopholes, and sufficing with lower-level technology—are just detours. They are not long-term solutions; nor can they be the foundation of China’s national security. The US restrictions have forced China to adopt new measures to accelerate domestic innovation with more focus on basic research and market forces. How the tech war will play out has important implications for Western countries and global supply chains. This policy brief will focus on China’s responses to the US-waged tech war, specifically: What have been China’s domestic measures to respond to the tech restrictions from the US, and what is China’s potential for technological breakthrough? What have been China’s international responses, and what are China’s options for retaliation?
Topic:
Science and Technology, Sanctions, Strategic Competition, Rivalry, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

1517. A Brief History of Senior International Officers on U.S. Higher Education Campuses

Author:
Allan E. Goodman and Mirka Martel
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute of International Education (IIE)
Abstract:
A Brief History of Senior International Officers on U.S. Higher Education Campuses captures the diversity of SIO roles, their varied accomplishments and challenges, and the tools and strategies needed to make them most successful. Based on survey data and select interviews with 200 SIOs from across the United States, our findings reflect the complexities of SIO responsibilities and priorities. Collected during the COVID-19 pandemic, our research focuses on strategic factors and considerations for success as SIOs navigate the path forward. We hope that the findings from our research contribute to an important and wider discussion about the SIO role on U.S. higher education campuses and its need to continue to advocate for internationalization and academic exchange.
Topic:
Higher Education, Internationalization, and Academic Exchange
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

1518. Spring 2023 Snapshot on International Educational Exchange

Author:
Julie Baer and Mirka Martel
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute of International Education (IIE)
Abstract:
The Spring 2023 Snapshot on International Educational Exchange continues the commitment of the Institute of International Education (IIE) to map the current state of international educational exchange to and from the United States. The report presents data from 527 U.S. higher education institutions in two sections: (1) current trends in international students studying at U.S. institutions in spring 2023 and recruitment patterns for prospective students and (2) the realities of U.S. study abroad in summer 2023 and academic year 2023/24. Each section is supplemented by special analyses on underrepresented populations participating in international educational exchange. On inbound mobility, we present data on non-degree international students and refugees and displaced students. The study abroad section includes insights on data collection of underrepresented populations in study abroad, including students with high financial need, first generation students, and other populations.
Topic:
Education, Higher Education, Students, and International Exchange
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

1519. The World After Taiwan’s Fall

Author:
David Santoro, Ralph Cossa, Ian Easton, Malcolm Davis, and Matake Kamiya
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
Let us start with our bottom line: a failure of the United States to come to Taiwan’s aid—politically, economically, and militarily—would devastate the Unites States’ credibility and defense commitments to its allies and partners, not just in Asia, but globally. If the United States tries but fails to prevent a Chinese takeover of Taiwan, the impact could be equally devastating unless there is a concentrated, coordinated U.S. attempt with likeminded allies and partners to halt further Chinese aggression and eventually roll back Beijing’s ill-gotten gains. This is not a hypothetical assessment. Taiwan has been increasingly under the threat of a military takeover by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and, even today, is under attack politically, economically, psychologically, and through so-called “gray zone” military actions short of actual combat. The U.S. government, U.S. allies, and others have begun to pay attention to this problem, yet to this day, they have not sufficiently appreciated the strategic implications that such a takeover would generate. To address this problem, the Pacific Forum has conducted a multi-authored study to raise awareness in Washington, key allied capitals, and beyond about the consequences of a Chinese victory in a war over Taiwan and, more importantly, to drive them to take appropriate action to prevent it. The study, which provides six national perspectives on this question (a U.S., Australian, Japanese, Korean, Indian, and European perspective) and fed its findings and recommendations into the second round of the DTRA SI-STT-sponsored (and Pacific Forum-run) Track 2 “U.S.-Taiwan Deterrence and Defense Dialogue,”[1] outlines these strategic implications in two alternative scenarios. In the first scenario, China attacks Taiwan and it falls with no outside assistance from the United States or others. In the other scenario, Taiwan falls to China despite outside assistance (i.e., “a too little, too late” scenario).
Topic:
Security, Conflict, Crisis Management, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Europe, India, Taiwan, Asia, Korea, and United States of America

1520. Strategic Competition and Security Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Carl W Baker
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
There is a growing acceptance among countries in the Indo-Pacific region that strategic competition between the United States and China is changing perceptions about security and the adequacy of the existing security architecture. While some have characterized the competition between the two as a new Cold War, it is clear that what is happening in the region is far more complex than the competition that characterized the original Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union. First, the economic integration that has taken place since the early 1990s makes it much more difficult to draw bright ideological lines between the two sides. Further, the Asian context of the emerging competition is one where the two competitors have grown to share power. As the dominant military power, the United States has been the primary security guarantor in Asia and beyond. China, on the other hand, has emerged over the past decades as the primary economic catalyst in Asia and beyond. Currently, each side seems increasingly unwilling to accept that arrangement.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Strategic Interests, and Competition
Political Geography:
China, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific