You are here

Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

The EU in Sharm-El-Sheikh: good cop at a bad COP?

When the cover decision of the UN climate change conference (COP27) in Sharm-El-Sheikh was finally accepted by all parties, it was clear that the EU had only been moderately successful. So the question remains if the EU could have done more. Or could it have engaged differently to achieve a more ambitious result of COP27, in particular with regards to reducing emissions or international climate finance? This blog post discusses key lessons for the EU as it prepares for the next rounds of global climate negotiations, including COP28 in Dubai. It suggests for the EU to act decisively in the months ahead, to enter the negotiations in good time and to demonstrate resolve on key issues, now including Loss and Damage. This requires the EU to dedicate more time and energy into its climate diplomacy and to live up to its announcements and pledges with commensurate resources politically, technically and, indeed, financially.

The EU in Sharm-El-Sheikh: good cop at a bad COP?

When the cover decision of the UN climate change conference (COP27) in Sharm-El-Sheikh was finally accepted by all parties, it was clear that the EU had only been moderately successful. So the question remains if the EU could have done more. Or could it have engaged differently to achieve a more ambitious result of COP27, in particular with regards to reducing emissions or international climate finance? This blog post discusses key lessons for the EU as it prepares for the next rounds of global climate negotiations, including COP28 in Dubai. It suggests for the EU to act decisively in the months ahead, to enter the negotiations in good time and to demonstrate resolve on key issues, now including Loss and Damage. This requires the EU to dedicate more time and energy into its climate diplomacy and to live up to its announcements and pledges with commensurate resources politically, technically and, indeed, financially.

The EU in Sharm-El-Sheikh: good cop at a bad COP?

When the cover decision of the UN climate change conference (COP27) in Sharm-El-Sheikh was finally accepted by all parties, it was clear that the EU had only been moderately successful. So the question remains if the EU could have done more. Or could it have engaged differently to achieve a more ambitious result of COP27, in particular with regards to reducing emissions or international climate finance? This blog post discusses key lessons for the EU as it prepares for the next rounds of global climate negotiations, including COP28 in Dubai. It suggests for the EU to act decisively in the months ahead, to enter the negotiations in good time and to demonstrate resolve on key issues, now including Loss and Damage. This requires the EU to dedicate more time and energy into its climate diplomacy and to live up to its announcements and pledges with commensurate resources politically, technically and, indeed, financially.

The global biodiversity framework needs a robust action agenda

It is anticipated that the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), held in Montreal, Canada, in December 2022, will agree on an ambitious, specific and measurable global biodiversity framework. However, governments alone are unlikely to reverse negative trends in biodiversity. This correspondence suggests that a biodiversity action agenda that mobilizes nature recovery actions from across society — including businesses, investors, civil society groups and local communities — should be included as a complement to governmental efforts. If governments can agree on a strong framework, an action agenda can create productive links between multilateral and transnational actions. However, if governments fail to agree on an ambitious framework the action agenda can help to sustain action and build momentum. The article argues that the action agenda should be complementary, catalytic, collaborative, comprehensive and credible to generate enthusiasm for a diverse array of actors to take biodiversity action.

The global biodiversity framework needs a robust action agenda

It is anticipated that the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), held in Montreal, Canada, in December 2022, will agree on an ambitious, specific and measurable global biodiversity framework. However, governments alone are unlikely to reverse negative trends in biodiversity. This correspondence suggests that a biodiversity action agenda that mobilizes nature recovery actions from across society — including businesses, investors, civil society groups and local communities — should be included as a complement to governmental efforts. If governments can agree on a strong framework, an action agenda can create productive links between multilateral and transnational actions. However, if governments fail to agree on an ambitious framework the action agenda can help to sustain action and build momentum. The article argues that the action agenda should be complementary, catalytic, collaborative, comprehensive and credible to generate enthusiasm for a diverse array of actors to take biodiversity action.

The global biodiversity framework needs a robust action agenda

It is anticipated that the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), held in Montreal, Canada, in December 2022, will agree on an ambitious, specific and measurable global biodiversity framework. However, governments alone are unlikely to reverse negative trends in biodiversity. This correspondence suggests that a biodiversity action agenda that mobilizes nature recovery actions from across society — including businesses, investors, civil society groups and local communities — should be included as a complement to governmental efforts. If governments can agree on a strong framework, an action agenda can create productive links between multilateral and transnational actions. However, if governments fail to agree on an ambitious framework the action agenda can help to sustain action and build momentum. The article argues that the action agenda should be complementary, catalytic, collaborative, comprehensive and credible to generate enthusiasm for a diverse array of actors to take biodiversity action.

Lessons from E10 Engagement on the Security Council

European Peace Institute / News - Wed, 30/11/2022 - 16:44

In recent years, the ten elected members of the Security Council, now commonly referred to as the E10, have come to play a more prominent role. Although there were previous periods when elected members were active and took initiative, the space for such contributions began to shrink in the mid-2000s. The emergence of the E10 as a construct and a more cohesive coalition on the Security Council is thus recent. Despite elected members’ different levels of commitment to collective E10 initiatives, and although the Council’s five permanent members have greater capacity, permanence, and veto power, there is a sense that the E10 have been able to influence the work of the Council, including its working methods, thematic issues, and some country-specific files.

This paper presents a broad policy perspective on lessons from both individual elected members and from the E10 as a group. It examines the E10’s recent engagement on the Council and offers lessons for how elected members can most effectively prepare for their term, serve on the Council, and ensure their legacy.

The paper concludes with reflections on the future of the E10 in a fragmented Security Council. While the E10 as a group have reached a level of maturity, their ability to coordinate across a diverse group whose effectiveness depends on several internal and external factors may have reached a natural limit. The E10’s composition, individual members’ level of commitment to collective E10 initiatives, and the group’s leadership all impact the E10’s ability to influence the work of the Council. While the E10 have been collectively successful at promoting certain issues and files and at making the Council more transparent, individual members have and will continue to have different views on many issues on the agenda. They will also continue to face structural inequalities when it comes to penholding and chairing subsidiary bodies.

Download

Security in the Indo-Pacific

SWP - Wed, 30/11/2022 - 01:00

Since the Korean War of 1950–53, the security architecture of the region previously referred to as the “Asia-Pacific” has been based on a US-led sys­tem of bilateral alliances known as the “hub-and-spokes” system. A multi­lateral system of collective defence, similar to NATO in Europe, has not existed in the region. In 2014, the People’s Republic of China under Xi Jinping began to develop its own ideas for reshaping the regional security system. Xi called the hub-and-spokes system a relic of the Cold War and called for a regional security architecture “by Asians for Asians”. The “Indo-Pacific” is widely regarded as a strategy to counter a Sinocentric restructuring of the region. The majority of actors involved conceives its security architecture as an antagonistic order in which security is estab­lished against, and not with, China. This architecture is more “Asianised” than before. The region’s US allies are gaining significance in relation to Washington. What’s more, bilateral and minilateral partnerships outside the hub-and-spokes system are becoming increasingly important, for example those involving states such as India or Indonesia. Structurally, bilateral alliances and partnerships dominate. They are in­creasingly supplemented by minilateral formats such as AUKUS or the Quad. For the EU and its member states, all this means that realising the idea of an inclusive Indo-Pacific has become a distant prospect. The effective multi­lateralism propagated by the EU is also gradually falling behind as the regional security architecture is increasingly being transformed into a web of bilateral and minilateral cooperation formats.

Türkische Angriffe in Syrien: Was bezweckt Erdogan?

SWP - Tue, 29/11/2022 - 17:21
Der türkische Präsident Recep Tayyip Erdogan hat den kurdischen Milizen in Syrien den Krieg erklärt. Nach den Luftangriffen der letzen Tage droht er eine Bodenoffensive an. Günter Seufert von der Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik sieht in diesem Vorgehen die Fortsetzung der türkischen Strategie in Syrien.

African Union-European Union cooperation on climate and energy: discussing perspectives on hydrogen and just transitions

Africa and the European Union (EU) have a shared interest in providing reliable and clean energy to their citizens, despite this being a rather heated moment of Africa-Europe relations in the area of climate and energy cooperation. Tensions concern the perceived protectionist slant of the European Green Deal, the EU’s “dash for gas” in Africa as part of its strategy to become more independent of Russian imports, and multilateral climate issues, such as at COP27 the balance between climate finance, loss and damage, and climate ambition. Hydrogen technologies have been prominent in discussions between the EU and African countries since the 2020 political push for hydrogen in Europe. In theory, cooperation on hydrogen may benefit both continents. Yet, techno-economic issues remain unsettled, and a framework for cooperation needs to be set up that includes both environmental and social criteria, economic benefits, as well as investments in industrialisation for producer regions. Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) have so far been targeted mainly at countries with rapidly growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as South Africa and Indonesia. While this is a legitimate focus, it risks leaving out most African countries, in particular the least developed ones. JETPs in Africa could focus on access to clean energy and bring important innovations in terms of country ownership and donor coordination.

African Union-European Union cooperation on climate and energy: discussing perspectives on hydrogen and just transitions

Africa and the European Union (EU) have a shared interest in providing reliable and clean energy to their citizens, despite this being a rather heated moment of Africa-Europe relations in the area of climate and energy cooperation. Tensions concern the perceived protectionist slant of the European Green Deal, the EU’s “dash for gas” in Africa as part of its strategy to become more independent of Russian imports, and multilateral climate issues, such as at COP27 the balance between climate finance, loss and damage, and climate ambition. Hydrogen technologies have been prominent in discussions between the EU and African countries since the 2020 political push for hydrogen in Europe. In theory, cooperation on hydrogen may benefit both continents. Yet, techno-economic issues remain unsettled, and a framework for cooperation needs to be set up that includes both environmental and social criteria, economic benefits, as well as investments in industrialisation for producer regions. Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) have so far been targeted mainly at countries with rapidly growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as South Africa and Indonesia. While this is a legitimate focus, it risks leaving out most African countries, in particular the least developed ones. JETPs in Africa could focus on access to clean energy and bring important innovations in terms of country ownership and donor coordination.

African Union-European Union cooperation on climate and energy: discussing perspectives on hydrogen and just transitions

Africa and the European Union (EU) have a shared interest in providing reliable and clean energy to their citizens, despite this being a rather heated moment of Africa-Europe relations in the area of climate and energy cooperation. Tensions concern the perceived protectionist slant of the European Green Deal, the EU’s “dash for gas” in Africa as part of its strategy to become more independent of Russian imports, and multilateral climate issues, such as at COP27 the balance between climate finance, loss and damage, and climate ambition. Hydrogen technologies have been prominent in discussions between the EU and African countries since the 2020 political push for hydrogen in Europe. In theory, cooperation on hydrogen may benefit both continents. Yet, techno-economic issues remain unsettled, and a framework for cooperation needs to be set up that includes both environmental and social criteria, economic benefits, as well as investments in industrialisation for producer regions. Just Energy Transition Partnerships (JETPs) have so far been targeted mainly at countries with rapidly growing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, such as South Africa and Indonesia. While this is a legitimate focus, it risks leaving out most African countries, in particular the least developed ones. JETPs in Africa could focus on access to clean energy and bring important innovations in terms of country ownership and donor coordination.

Entrepreneurship in Northeastern Syria

Drawing on the institutional approach, we describe the remarkable expansion of entrepreneurship in an under conflict area (Amuda-North east Syria), and explore its possible role in the future peace in Syria. Our findings indicate that; with the collapse of formal institutions constraining entrepreneurship, the disruption of supply chains and the weakness of new institutions; the entrepreneurs can depend on informal institutions that embrace entrepreneurship and deploy individual and social resources to exploit productive opportunities. Furthermore, those entrepreneurs have a possible positive role in the future development and peace.

Entrepreneurship in Northeastern Syria

Drawing on the institutional approach, we describe the remarkable expansion of entrepreneurship in an under conflict area (Amuda-North east Syria), and explore its possible role in the future peace in Syria. Our findings indicate that; with the collapse of formal institutions constraining entrepreneurship, the disruption of supply chains and the weakness of new institutions; the entrepreneurs can depend on informal institutions that embrace entrepreneurship and deploy individual and social resources to exploit productive opportunities. Furthermore, those entrepreneurs have a possible positive role in the future development and peace.

Entrepreneurship in Northeastern Syria

Drawing on the institutional approach, we describe the remarkable expansion of entrepreneurship in an under conflict area (Amuda-North east Syria), and explore its possible role in the future peace in Syria. Our findings indicate that; with the collapse of formal institutions constraining entrepreneurship, the disruption of supply chains and the weakness of new institutions; the entrepreneurs can depend on informal institutions that embrace entrepreneurship and deploy individual and social resources to exploit productive opportunities. Furthermore, those entrepreneurs have a possible positive role in the future development and peace.

eine studentische Hilfskraft (w/m/div) für den Vorstand

Die Abteilung Vorstand des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin) sucht zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt eine studentische Hilfskraft (w/m/div) für ca. 12 Wochenstunden.

Ihre Aufgabe ist die Unterstützung der Vorstandsreferent*innen, unter anderem, bei der Auswertung von Daten, Betreuung von Gremien und Erstellung von Konzepten. Zudem sind Sie beim administrativen Ablauf im Vorstandsbereich behilflich.


Forward detrending for heteroskedasticity-robust panel unit root testing

The variances of most economic time series display marked fluctuations over time. Panel unit root tests of the so-called first and second generation are not robust in such cases. In response to this problem, a few heteroskedasticity-robust panel unit root tests have been proposed. An important limitation of these tests is, however, that they become invalid if the data are trending. As a prominent means of drift adjustment under the panel unit root hypothesis, the (unweighted) forward detrending scheme of Breitung suffers from nuisance parameters if the data feature time-varying variances. In this article, we propose a weighted forward-detrending scheme. Unlike its unweighted counterpart, the new detrending scheme restores the pivotalness of the heteroskedasticity-robust panel unit root tests suggested by Demetrescu and Hanck and Herwartz et al. when applied to trending panels with heteroskedastic variances. As an empirical illustration, we provide evidence in favor of non-stationarity of health care expenditures as shares of GDP in a panel of OECD economies.

Pages