Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

This paper empirically examines the link between the cost of sovereign borrowing and climate risk for 40 advanced and emerging economies. Controlling for a large set of domestic and global factors, the paper shows that both vulnerability and resilience to climate risk are important factors driving the cost of sovereign borrowing at the global level. Overall, we find that vulnerability to the direct effects of climate change matter substantially more than climate risk resilience in terms of the implications for sovereign borrowing costs. Moreover, the magnitude of the effect on bond yields is progressively higher for countries deemed highly vulnerable to climate change. Impulse response analysis from a set of panel structural VAR models indicates that the reaction of bond yields to shocks imposed on climate vulnerability and resilience become permanent after around 12 quarters, with high risk economies experiencing larger permanent effects on yields than other country groups.

This paper empirically examines the reaction of global financial markets across 38 economies to the COVID-19 outbreak, with a special focus on the dynamics of capital flow across 14 emerging market economies. Using daily data over the period 4 January 2010 to 30 April 2020 and controlling for a host of domestic and global macroeconomic and financial factors, we use a fixed effects panel approach and a structural VAR framework to show that emerging markets have been more heavily affected than advanced economies. In particular, emerging economies in Asia and Europe have experienced the sharpest impact on stocks, bonds, and exchange rates due to COVID-19, as well as abrupt and substantial capital outflows. Our results indicate that fiscal stimulus packages introduced in response to COVID-19, as well as quantitative easing by central banks, have helped to restore overall investor confidence through reducing bond yields and boosting stock prices. Our findings also highlight the role that global factors and developments in the world’s leading financial centers have on financial conditions in EMEs. Importantly, the impact of COVID-19 related quantitative easing measures by central banks in advanced countries, which helped to lower sovereign bond yields and prop up stock markets at home, extended to EMEs, notably in relation to stabilizing capital flow dynamics. Going forward, while the ultimate resolution of COVID-19 may be expected to lead to a market correction as uncertainty declines, our impulse response analysis suggests that there may be some permanent effects on financial markets and capital flows as a result of COVID-19, particularly in EMEs.

This paper empirically examines the reaction of global financial markets across 38 economies to the COVID-19 outbreak, with a special focus on the dynamics of capital flow across 14 emerging market economies. Using daily data over the period 4 January 2010 to 30 April 2020 and controlling for a host of domestic and global macroeconomic and financial factors, we use a fixed effects panel approach and a structural VAR framework to show that emerging markets have been more heavily affected than advanced economies. In particular, emerging economies in Asia and Europe have experienced the sharpest impact on stocks, bonds, and exchange rates due to COVID-19, as well as abrupt and substantial capital outflows. Our results indicate that fiscal stimulus packages introduced in response to COVID-19, as well as quantitative easing by central banks, have helped to restore overall investor confidence through reducing bond yields and boosting stock prices. Our findings also highlight the role that global factors and developments in the world’s leading financial centers have on financial conditions in EMEs. Importantly, the impact of COVID-19 related quantitative easing measures by central banks in advanced countries, which helped to lower sovereign bond yields and prop up stock markets at home, extended to EMEs, notably in relation to stabilizing capital flow dynamics. Going forward, while the ultimate resolution of COVID-19 may be expected to lead to a market correction as uncertainty declines, our impulse response analysis suggests that there may be some permanent effects on financial markets and capital flows as a result of COVID-19, particularly in EMEs.

This paper empirically examines the reaction of global financial markets across 38 economies to the COVID-19 outbreak, with a special focus on the dynamics of capital flow across 14 emerging market economies. Using daily data over the period 4 January 2010 to 30 April 2020 and controlling for a host of domestic and global macroeconomic and financial factors, we use a fixed effects panel approach and a structural VAR framework to show that emerging markets have been more heavily affected than advanced economies. In particular, emerging economies in Asia and Europe have experienced the sharpest impact on stocks, bonds, and exchange rates due to COVID-19, as well as abrupt and substantial capital outflows. Our results indicate that fiscal stimulus packages introduced in response to COVID-19, as well as quantitative easing by central banks, have helped to restore overall investor confidence through reducing bond yields and boosting stock prices. Our findings also highlight the role that global factors and developments in the world’s leading financial centers have on financial conditions in EMEs. Importantly, the impact of COVID-19 related quantitative easing measures by central banks in advanced countries, which helped to lower sovereign bond yields and prop up stock markets at home, extended to EMEs, notably in relation to stabilizing capital flow dynamics. Going forward, while the ultimate resolution of COVID-19 may be expected to lead to a market correction as uncertainty declines, our impulse response analysis suggests that there may be some permanent effects on financial markets and capital flows as a result of COVID-19, particularly in EMEs.

This collection provides a comprehensive review of the tools and methodologies for Environmental Risk Analysis used by a few dozen financial institutions, including banks, asset managers and insurance companies. These tools and methodologies cover a wide-range of environmental/climate scenario analyses and stress tests as well as environmental, social and governance analysis and natural capital risk assessment, that can be used to analyze the potential impact on financial institutions from transition and physical risks associated with climate and other environmental factors.

This collection provides a comprehensive review of the tools and methodologies for Environmental Risk Analysis used by a few dozen financial institutions, including banks, asset managers and insurance companies. These tools and methodologies cover a wide-range of environmental/climate scenario analyses and stress tests as well as environmental, social and governance analysis and natural capital risk assessment, that can be used to analyze the potential impact on financial institutions from transition and physical risks associated with climate and other environmental factors.

This collection provides a comprehensive review of the tools and methodologies for Environmental Risk Analysis used by a few dozen financial institutions, including banks, asset managers and insurance companies. These tools and methodologies cover a wide-range of environmental/climate scenario analyses and stress tests as well as environmental, social and governance analysis and natural capital risk assessment, that can be used to analyze the potential impact on financial institutions from transition and physical risks associated with climate and other environmental factors.

Increasing resilience needs to be one of the main guiding principles when rebuilding our economies and societies after the crisis. We need to ensure we are better prepared to withstand future pandemics but also the other major looming threat to humanity—climate change.

Increasing resilience needs to be one of the main guiding principles when rebuilding our economies and societies after the crisis. We need to ensure we are better prepared to withstand future pandemics but also the other major looming threat to humanity—climate change.

Increasing resilience needs to be one of the main guiding principles when rebuilding our economies and societies after the crisis. We need to ensure we are better prepared to withstand future pandemics but also the other major looming threat to humanity—climate change.

We call for strengthening the Global Financial Safety Net (GFSN) to manage the economic effects of the outbreak of COVID-19, in particular the massive capital outflows from emerging market and developing economies and the global shortage of dollar liquidity. Both the United Nations (UN) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimate that emerging market and developing countries (EMDEs) need an immediate $2.5 trillion, yet the financing available to them is just $700 to $971 billion. To meet these immediate needs we propose to: (i) broaden the coverage of the Federal Reserve currency swaps; (ii) issue at least $500 billion of Special Drawing Rights through the IMF; (iii) improve the IMF’s precautionary and emergency facilities; (iv) establish a multilateral swap facility at the IMF; (v) increase the resources and geographic coverage of Regional Financial Arrangements; (vi) coordinate capital flow management measures; (vii) initiate debt restructuring and relief initiatives; and (viii) request that credit-rating agencies stop making downgrades during the emergency. It argues that beyond these immediate measures, leaders should swiftly move to address the following structural gaps in the GFSN: (i) agree on a quota reform at the IMF; (ii) create an appropriate Sovereign Debt Restructuring Regime; (iii) expand surveillance activity; and (iv) adopt IMF governance reform and strengthen its relations with all agents of the GFSN. All of these immediate and intermediate reforms must be calibrated toward a just transition to a more stable, inclusive, and sustainable global economy

We call for strengthening the Global Financial Safety Net (GFSN) to manage the economic effects of the outbreak of COVID-19, in particular the massive capital outflows from emerging market and developing economies and the global shortage of dollar liquidity. Both the United Nations (UN) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimate that emerging market and developing countries (EMDEs) need an immediate $2.5 trillion, yet the financing available to them is just $700 to $971 billion. To meet these immediate needs we propose to: (i) broaden the coverage of the Federal Reserve currency swaps; (ii) issue at least $500 billion of Special Drawing Rights through the IMF; (iii) improve the IMF’s precautionary and emergency facilities; (iv) establish a multilateral swap facility at the IMF; (v) increase the resources and geographic coverage of Regional Financial Arrangements; (vi) coordinate capital flow management measures; (vii) initiate debt restructuring and relief initiatives; and (viii) request that credit-rating agencies stop making downgrades during the emergency. It argues that beyond these immediate measures, leaders should swiftly move to address the following structural gaps in the GFSN: (i) agree on a quota reform at the IMF; (ii) create an appropriate Sovereign Debt Restructuring Regime; (iii) expand surveillance activity; and (iv) adopt IMF governance reform and strengthen its relations with all agents of the GFSN. All of these immediate and intermediate reforms must be calibrated toward a just transition to a more stable, inclusive, and sustainable global economy

We call for strengthening the Global Financial Safety Net (GFSN) to manage the economic effects of the outbreak of COVID-19, in particular the massive capital outflows from emerging market and developing economies and the global shortage of dollar liquidity. Both the United Nations (UN) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimate that emerging market and developing countries (EMDEs) need an immediate $2.5 trillion, yet the financing available to them is just $700 to $971 billion. To meet these immediate needs we propose to: (i) broaden the coverage of the Federal Reserve currency swaps; (ii) issue at least $500 billion of Special Drawing Rights through the IMF; (iii) improve the IMF’s precautionary and emergency facilities; (iv) establish a multilateral swap facility at the IMF; (v) increase the resources and geographic coverage of Regional Financial Arrangements; (vi) coordinate capital flow management measures; (vii) initiate debt restructuring and relief initiatives; and (viii) request that credit-rating agencies stop making downgrades during the emergency. It argues that beyond these immediate measures, leaders should swiftly move to address the following structural gaps in the GFSN: (i) agree on a quota reform at the IMF; (ii) create an appropriate Sovereign Debt Restructuring Regime; (iii) expand surveillance activity; and (iv) adopt IMF governance reform and strengthen its relations with all agents of the GFSN. All of these immediate and intermediate reforms must be calibrated toward a just transition to a more stable, inclusive, and sustainable global economy

Dans la nuit du 6 au 7 septembre 2020, un incendie ravageait le plus grand camp de réfugiés d’Europe, le camp de la Moria sur l’île de Lesbos, en Grèce, lequel abritait 12 700 personnes, soit quatre fois sa capacité d’accueil maximale. Cette tragédie humanitaire a poussé la présidente de la Commission Ursula von der Leyen à hâter la présentation de son "Pacte pour la migration". 

Attendu depuis des mois et reporté pour…

Nature : Stage
Lieu : Paris 8e
Durée : 6 mois
Début : à partir de janvier 2020
Domaine : Communication digitale 

Stage à l'Institut Montaigne (think tank), rattaché(e) au pôle digital de la direction du marketing et de la communication, vous travaillerez…

Effective and sustainable multilateral peace and security initiatives in Africa depend on a strong partnership between the United Nations and the African Union. While their strategic partnership has grown since 2017, collective peacebuilding efforts still lag behind cooperation in other areas. Different institutional mandates, policy frameworks, and operational practices have led them to carve out distinct roles in the multilateral peacebuilding space, often impeding closer cooperation.

This report—a joint publication of IPI and the Institute for Security Studies (ISS)—analyzes the UN and AU’s approaches to peacebuilding and identifies opportunities for a more robust and effective peacebuilding partnership. These include aligning their political strategies, fostering cooperation between the AU Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) and the UN Peacebuilding Commission (UNPBC), reconciling differences in their peacebuilding approaches, securing sustainable financing, and capitalizing on emergent peacebuilding approaches. The paper concludes with recommendations for UN and AU member states and officials:

• UN and AU member states should build consensus around shared peacebuilding concerns, better institutionalize the working relationship between the AUPSC and the UN Africa Group, and strengthen implementation of the recommendations from the 2018 meeting between the AUPSC and UNPBC.
• UN and AU officials should include peacebuilding and development personnel in annual engagements on peace and security, explore opportunities for joint analysis and planning for peacebuilding activities, and share more analysis and expertise at the working level.

Download

Am 23. September 2020 hat die Europäische Kommission ihren lange erwarteten Ent­wurf eines neuen Migrations- und Asylpakets vorgelegt, das die seit Jahren andauernde Blockade in diesem Politikfeld überwinden soll. Zentrale Elemente sind die geplanten Vorprüfungen von Asylverfahren an den EU-Außengrenzen und eine neue Arbeitsteilung unter den Mitgliedstaaten, die künftig die Wahl haben zwischen der Aufnahme von Schutzsuchenden und der Rückführung abgelehnter Asylbewerber. Die menschenrecht­lichen Risiken, die diesen Neuerungen anhaften, sind immens. Da dies aber – wie die Lage auf den griechischen Inseln zeigt – auch für den Status quo gilt, ist das Für und Wider des Reformvorschlags sorgfältig abzuwägen. Eine Unterstützung des Reform­pakets lässt sich nur rechtfertigen, wenn die von der Kommission angestrebte Kopp­lung restriktiver und schutzorientierter Elemente in den zwischenstaatlichen Ver­handlungen beibehalten wird.

Le numérique en santé est une opportunité unique de moderniser notre système de santé en le rendant plus transparent, plus accessible et au plus proche des attentes des patients et des professionnels de santé. La crise sanitaire actuelle démontre chaque jour l’intérêt de la e-santé, tant pour suivre l’évolution de l’épidémie que pour la contrôler et assurer la continuité des soins à distance. Ces derniers mois, les pouvoirs publics ont pris un certain nombre de…