Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik / Briefing Paper

PDF/EPUB Cite Share options Information, rights and permissions Metrics and citations Figures and tables Abstract In 2004 the European Union (EU)’s membership grew from 15 to 25 member states. This article analyses how the EU used this ‘big bang enlargement’ to promote horizontal and vertical expansion to its role as a global development actor. It describes how the Union’s larger membership realised considerable horizontal expansion, primarily by increasing the development cooperation budget managed by the EU institutions. The global financial crisis, austerity measures in its member states as well as legal and institutional changes, however, hampered vertical expansion, with many member states failing to sufficiently increase their own national budgets and efforts to promote coordination and harmonisation delivering limited results. The understanding of the task division between the EU and its member states has evolved with the EU having gained a stronger role as a global development actor in its own right. This article contextualises and describes these expansion patterns by analysing key policy trends in the period 2000–2025 in a historical and international perspective and contributes new evidence to the literature on international organisation expansion.

Carbon pricing is widely recognized as a key tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, if implemented without compensatory measures, it can increase poverty and inequality. The aim of this paper is to examine the role of carbon pricing in generating fiscal space for expanding social protection systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Using tax-benefit microsimulation models for six countries (Ecuador, Indonesia, South Af rica, Tanzania, Viet Nam, and Zambia), we assess both the direct distributional impacts of carbon pricing and the potential poverty-reducing effects of recycling revenues into social protection. Our f indings show that even modest carbon pricing can mobilize substantial resources, particularly in higher-emission countries, and that channelling these revenues into targeted or categorical transfers significantly cushions households against welfare losses. The results highlight the dual role of carbon pricing: as a climate mitigation instrument and as a source of fiscal capacity for inclusive development. By ref raming climate policy as a means to expand social protection, this study underscores the opportunities and constraints for designing equitable climate–development strategies in the Global South.

Central Asia has emerged as a key region where the convergence of geopolitics and development cooperation is most visible. Major powers are redefining their approaches: Japan combines official development assistance (ODA) with commercial partnerships to advance connectivity and reform; the EU is emphasising a sustainable infrastructure and governance-oriented approach; the US is expected to catalyse private investment rather than direct aid; China deepens its regional presence through the Belt and Road Initiative; while Russia leverages historical and security ties to maintain influence. Meanwhile, middle powers – countries that do not wield vast influence like major powers but possess substantial capacity to shape international events – are exploring new opportunities for engagement. Türkiye positions itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South, emphasising connectivity and energy cooperation through the Middle Corridor and the Organization of Turkic States.
South Korea’s 2025 ODA Strategy for Central Asia identifies the region as a strategic partner for shared growth, integrating pragmatic diplomacy with value-based cooperation. By leveraging their soft power and policy experience, these middle powers offer a distinctive model for development partnership. Central Asian governments are responding to a changing international environment by diversifying partnerships through regional integration and more strategic engagement with development  partners.

Hyeyoung Woo is a specialist at the Center for International Development (CID), Korea Development Institute (KDI). From July to October 2025, she served as a guest researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). She holds a Ph.D. in Development Policy from the KDI School of Public Policy and Management, where her dissertation examined transition countries, including those in Central Asia. Over the past years, she has contributed to policy consultations through Korea’s Knowledge Sharing Program (KSP) with Uzbekistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, particularly in fintech regulatory sandbox development and official development assistance (ODA) evaluation.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – the global framework establishing 17 universal and interconnected goals to guide sustainable development efforts – was adopted in 2015 following a uniquely participative and ambitious process. A decade on, it is increasingly evident that most of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are unlikely to be achieved by 2030 as originally envisioned. Discussions about a follow-up framework beyond 2030 are gaining momentum ahead of the SDG Summit in September 2027. This paper evaluates the process design, inclusiveness, negotiating strategies, fora and fault lines in 2015 and discusses to what extent the lessons learned can be applied to negotiations for a potential follow-up framework. We find that several process design elements and negotiation strategies, as well as actor composition, fostered trust and ownership, reduced polarisation and enabled agreements on ambitious targets. In particular, the process benefited from the inclusion of diverse, non-hierarchical actor communities, a long, science-based stocktaking phase, the breaking up of traditional negotiating blocks, transparency, and emphasis on common interests. We also identify several recurring fault lines that are overwhelmingly still relevant today. Apart from the above best practices of the process leading to the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, we identify several shortcomings that should be addressed in the beyond-2030 negotiations: inefficiencies due to competing tracks for the development of the goals; top-down agenda-setting processes leading to less ambitious outcomes; barriers to participation of and accountability towards some marginalised and informal actors; and the watering down of goals and indicators – including non-tangible targets and unresolved inconsistencies and trade-offs within the agenda. Finally, the paper argues that the beyond-2030 negotiations will take place in a context that is similar to the process that led to the SDGs but is nevertheless in many ways more challenging than in 2015, amidst intensifying crises, political shifts and loss of trust.

This study examines portrayals of marine mammal celebrities (MMCs) in popular culture over the past 70 years, reflecting evolving public attitudes toward ocean conservation. It identifies four main types of MMCs, each linked to a specific era and shaped by changes in media landscapes, perceptions of marine mammal agency and welfare, and conservation priorities: (1) Hollywood MMCs (ca. 1960–1990s)—wild animals captured and exhibited in aquaria, cast as celebrities based on their roles in traditional mass media (blockbuster movies); (2) MMCs in human care (ca. 1990s–2010s)—animals housed in aquaria whose fame stemmed from public concern about their welfare and calls for their release; (3) rescued MMCs (ca. 1980s–present)—marine mammals cared for by humans after they were injured in the ocean; and (4) endangered and dangerous MMCs (2010s–present)—wild animals that approach humans, demonstrate human‐like behaviours, or interact with boats. Introducing the method of “following the animal,” the article provides examples of celebrity animals that illustrate each of the four categories, such as the dolphin Flipper and the walrus Freya. The study contributes to the thematic issue on "Ocean Pop: Marine Imaginaries in the Age of Global Polycrisis" by highlighting the mutual influence of media, animal celebrity, and conservation, and urges further research into how shifting representations shape global engagement with marine life and the environment.

The emerging global system is one in which three nuclear-armed leaders, insulated from dissent, pursue risky gambits. The result will not be the relatively stable if tense competition that characterized the Cold War. It will be something more volatile: a world in which the most consequential decisions rest on the whims of men who have systematically discarded anyone willing to tell them no.