Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Russia’s attack on Ukraine has put into sometimes sharp relief the different perspectives of inter- and transnational cooperation. The violation of the rules-based order after WWII caused shockwaves, specifically in Europe. Experiences of partners in, say, Africa or Asia with this international order historically differ from the European ones; consequently, even if we might share values, perspectives differ. While inter- and transnational cooperation is more needed than ever, cooperation takes place across deepened ideological rifts and conflicting material interests. This is a politically more complex world.

We thus need better structures for transnational knowledge cooperation and individuals who have the skills to navigate unchartered and sometimes choppy waters and address tensions in these difficult times. Training of actors is thus crucial, as a "Zeitenwende" is characterised by the absence of "business as usual". Consequently, building and strengthening competencies of staff (and partners) to enable them to (re)act to and shape new and challenging situations matters largely for transnational cooperation.

Russia’s attack on Ukraine has put into sometimes sharp relief the different perspectives of inter- and transnational cooperation. The violation of the rules-based order after WWII caused shockwaves, specifically in Europe. Experiences of partners in, say, Africa or Asia with this international order historically differ from the European ones; consequently, even if we might share values, perspectives differ. While inter- and transnational cooperation is more needed than ever, cooperation takes place across deepened ideological rifts and conflicting material interests. This is a politically more complex world.

We thus need better structures for transnational knowledge cooperation and individuals who have the skills to navigate unchartered and sometimes choppy waters and address tensions in these difficult times. Training of actors is thus crucial, as a "Zeitenwende" is characterised by the absence of "business as usual". Consequently, building and strengthening competencies of staff (and partners) to enable them to (re)act to and shape new and challenging situations matters largely for transnational cooperation.

That inter-ministerial competition doesn’t make for more successful foreign policy is a commonplace observation. However, it isn’t enough that all parts of government pull together, they must move together in the right direction.

That inter-ministerial competition doesn’t make for more successful foreign policy is a commonplace observation. However, it isn’t enough that all parts of government pull together, they must move together in the right direction.

That inter-ministerial competition doesn’t make for more successful foreign policy is a commonplace observation. However, it isn’t enough that all parts of government pull together, they must move together in the right direction.

Die im DIW Berlin angesiedelte forschungsbasierte Infrastruktureinrichtung Sozio-oekonomisches Panel (SOEP) sucht zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt bis zu zwei studentische Hilfskräfte (w/m/div) für 8-15 Wochenstunden. 

Ihre Aufgabe ist die Unterstützung der Forschung im Rahmen der Nachwuchsgruppe „Social and Psychological Determinants of Mental Health in the Life Course (SocPsych-MH]". Dabei arbeiten sie mit komplexen Paneldaten, recherchieren zu aktuellen sozialwissenschaftlichen Themen und Methoden und erleben das Arbeiten in einem interdisziplinär orientierten Team.

Although geographically distant, there is considerable convergence in the development policy priorities of Germany and the Republic of Korea (hereafter: Korea) – and indeed scope for cooperation between them. Whereas Germany was a founding member of the international development cooperation system as we know it today, Korea is a recent member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and its Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and both an important former recipient as well as a current provider of development cooperation.
The development policies and operations of Germany and Korea are confronted by a challenging global geopolitical and economic setting, as well as a worrying decline in human development globally. Both countries are being challenged to respond to this changing setting and to communicate such changes effectively in their contributions towards advancing sustainable development at home and through international cooperation.
Both countries have seen considerable increases in their official development assistance (ODA) budgets during the past decade, with Korea expected to continue its gradual growth path, whereas Germany may face challenges to consolidate its ODA budget – notwithstanding its important position as the only G7 member that has reached the target of providing 0.7 per cent of its gross national income (GNI) as ODA.
This policy brief describes and discusses the German and Korean systems for setting development policy.

Although geographically distant, there is considerable convergence in the development policy priorities of Germany and the Republic of Korea (hereafter: Korea) – and indeed scope for cooperation between them. Whereas Germany was a founding member of the international development cooperation system as we know it today, Korea is a recent member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and its Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and both an important former recipient as well as a current provider of development cooperation.
The development policies and operations of Germany and Korea are confronted by a challenging global geopolitical and economic setting, as well as a worrying decline in human development globally. Both countries are being challenged to respond to this changing setting and to communicate such changes effectively in their contributions towards advancing sustainable development at home and through international cooperation.
Both countries have seen considerable increases in their official development assistance (ODA) budgets during the past decade, with Korea expected to continue its gradual growth path, whereas Germany may face challenges to consolidate its ODA budget – notwithstanding its important position as the only G7 member that has reached the target of providing 0.7 per cent of its gross national income (GNI) as ODA.
This policy brief describes and discusses the German and Korean systems for setting development policy.

Although geographically distant, there is considerable convergence in the development policy priorities of Germany and the Republic of Korea (hereafter: Korea) – and indeed scope for cooperation between them. Whereas Germany was a founding member of the international development cooperation system as we know it today, Korea is a recent member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and its Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and both an important former recipient as well as a current provider of development cooperation.
The development policies and operations of Germany and Korea are confronted by a challenging global geopolitical and economic setting, as well as a worrying decline in human development globally. Both countries are being challenged to respond to this changing setting and to communicate such changes effectively in their contributions towards advancing sustainable development at home and through international cooperation.
Both countries have seen considerable increases in their official development assistance (ODA) budgets during the past decade, with Korea expected to continue its gradual growth path, whereas Germany may face challenges to consolidate its ODA budget – notwithstanding its important position as the only G7 member that has reached the target of providing 0.7 per cent of its gross national income (GNI) as ODA.
This policy brief describes and discusses the German and Korean systems for setting development policy.

The Gender Economics Research Group in the Public Economics Department is looking for a Postdoc (f/m/nonbinary).

The Gender Economics Research Group within the Public Economics department of the DIW Berlin seeks a PhD economist to conduct innovative research and policy analysis in the areas of gender economics. A strong record in applied econometrics is a necessary prerequisite. Candidates must demonstrate the potential to contribute substantially to academic research and policy analysis, including the ability to recognize and articulate differing viewpoints related to their work. Researchers at the department do not have any teaching obligations but are expected to contribute to the policy work of the department. Voluntary teaching opportunities exist at all levels.

Die forschungsbasierte Infrastruktureinrichtung Sozio-oekonomisches Panel (SOEP) im DIW Berlin sucht zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt eine*n wissenschaftliche*n Mitarbeiter*in für 13,65 Wochenstunden (35% TVöD EG13).

Das Deutsche Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin) sucht für die Stabsstelle Strategisches Controlling zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt eine*n Mitarbeiter*in im Controlling (w/m/div) (Vollzeit mit 39 Stunden pro Woche, Teilzeit ist möglich).

Many governments adopt policies and actively compete to attract foreign direct investment (FDI). Particularly for lower-income countries, attracting FDI – and with it the benefits of cooperating with multi-national enterprises (MNEs) – is a promising strategy for participating in global supply chains and increasing local firm productivity. However, empirical findings show contrasting effects and there is heated debate over FDI’s advantages and drawbacks. The current trend to rising market concentration also begs the question: Have FDI effects changed in recent years?
This Policy Brief aims to address these questions by studying FDI and what the apparent growth in market concentration implies. Although foreign investment theoretically raises productivity, creates employment and offers many other benefits, the empirical evidence is not unequivocal. Initial coarse country-level data found that receptivity to FDI raises the host country’s economic growth. But later research used more detailed sector data and showed ambiguous effects (Görg & Greenaway, 2004). New microdata confirm that FDI effects are differential: Not all workers and households benefit equally. They also showcase the different ways in which MNEs and FDI benefit firms, workers and households in host countries. Recently, superstar firms, which capture large shares of industries and thereby increase market con-centration, have emerged. Linked to reduced national economic dynamism and evident in global markets, the rise of superstar firms could negatively impact on FDI effects. They differ from MNE competition effects and confer market power so that MNEs can determine prices and wages. This trend toward rising market concentration is observed across multiple sectors and has several possible causes, such as technological and legal factors.
A literature survey reveals a lack of evidence about how rising concentration in global markets is affecting FDI gains. However, other evidence suggests that the positive spillovers to domestic firms may well be lower, with higher market concentration negatively affecting wages and employment. The following takeaways can be derived for policy-making:
1. Integrate competition policy: Competition effects should be considered when evaluating FDI and policies should be introduced to ensure competitive practises after FDI entry.
2. Improve monitoring: Collect data on competi-tive forces and how they change when MNEs enter host economies.
3. Absorb regressive effects: Introduce social benefits to counter the potential mixed effects of FDI and MNE market power.

Many governments adopt policies and actively compete to attract foreign direct investment (FDI). Particularly for lower-income countries, attracting FDI – and with it the benefits of cooperating with multi-national enterprises (MNEs) – is a promising strategy for participating in global supply chains and increasing local firm productivity. However, empirical findings show contrasting effects and there is heated debate over FDI’s advantages and drawbacks. The current trend to rising market concentration also begs the question: Have FDI effects changed in recent years?
This Policy Brief aims to address these questions by studying FDI and what the apparent growth in market concentration implies. Although foreign investment theoretically raises productivity, creates employment and offers many other benefits, the empirical evidence is not unequivocal. Initial coarse country-level data found that receptivity to FDI raises the host country’s economic growth. But later research used more detailed sector data and showed ambiguous effects (Görg & Greenaway, 2004). New microdata confirm that FDI effects are differential: Not all workers and households benefit equally. They also showcase the different ways in which MNEs and FDI benefit firms, workers and households in host countries. Recently, superstar firms, which capture large shares of industries and thereby increase market con-centration, have emerged. Linked to reduced national economic dynamism and evident in global markets, the rise of superstar firms could negatively impact on FDI effects. They differ from MNE competition effects and confer market power so that MNEs can determine prices and wages. This trend toward rising market concentration is observed across multiple sectors and has several possible causes, such as technological and legal factors.
A literature survey reveals a lack of evidence about how rising concentration in global markets is affecting FDI gains. However, other evidence suggests that the positive spillovers to domestic firms may well be lower, with higher market concentration negatively affecting wages and employment. The following takeaways can be derived for policy-making:
1. Integrate competition policy: Competition effects should be considered when evaluating FDI and policies should be introduced to ensure competitive practises after FDI entry.
2. Improve monitoring: Collect data on competi-tive forces and how they change when MNEs enter host economies.
3. Absorb regressive effects: Introduce social benefits to counter the potential mixed effects of FDI and MNE market power.

Many governments adopt policies and actively compete to attract foreign direct investment (FDI). Particularly for lower-income countries, attracting FDI – and with it the benefits of cooperating with multi-national enterprises (MNEs) – is a promising strategy for participating in global supply chains and increasing local firm productivity. However, empirical findings show contrasting effects and there is heated debate over FDI’s advantages and drawbacks. The current trend to rising market concentration also begs the question: Have FDI effects changed in recent years?
This Policy Brief aims to address these questions by studying FDI and what the apparent growth in market concentration implies. Although foreign investment theoretically raises productivity, creates employment and offers many other benefits, the empirical evidence is not unequivocal. Initial coarse country-level data found that receptivity to FDI raises the host country’s economic growth. But later research used more detailed sector data and showed ambiguous effects (Görg & Greenaway, 2004). New microdata confirm that FDI effects are differential: Not all workers and households benefit equally. They also showcase the different ways in which MNEs and FDI benefit firms, workers and households in host countries. Recently, superstar firms, which capture large shares of industries and thereby increase market con-centration, have emerged. Linked to reduced national economic dynamism and evident in global markets, the rise of superstar firms could negatively impact on FDI effects. They differ from MNE competition effects and confer market power so that MNEs can determine prices and wages. This trend toward rising market concentration is observed across multiple sectors and has several possible causes, such as technological and legal factors.
A literature survey reveals a lack of evidence about how rising concentration in global markets is affecting FDI gains. However, other evidence suggests that the positive spillovers to domestic firms may well be lower, with higher market concentration negatively affecting wages and employment. The following takeaways can be derived for policy-making:
1. Integrate competition policy: Competition effects should be considered when evaluating FDI and policies should be introduced to ensure competitive practises after FDI entry.
2. Improve monitoring: Collect data on competi-tive forces and how they change when MNEs enter host economies.
3. Absorb regressive effects: Introduce social benefits to counter the potential mixed effects of FDI and MNE market power.

Coastal communities across the world face intense and frequent flooding due to the rise in extreme rainfall and storm surges associated with climate change. Adaptation is therefore crucial to manage the growing threat to coastal communities and cities. This case study focuses on Lagos, Nigeria, one of the world's largest urban centers where rapid urbanization, poor urban planning, degrading infrastructure, and inadequate preparedness compounds flood vulnerability. We situate flood risk perceptions within the context of climate-induced mobilities in Lagos, which no study has done, filling a necessary knowledge gap. Furthermore, we apply a unique approach to flood risk perception and its linkage to migration, by using three measures of risk – affect, probability, and consequence, as opposed to a singular measure. Results show that the affect measure of flood risk perception is significantly higher than probability and consequence measures. Furthermore, flood risk perception is shaped by prior experiences with flooding and proximity to hazard. The effect of proximity on risk perception differs across the three measures. We also found that flood risk perceptions and future migration intentions are positively correlated. These results demonstrate the usefulness of using multiple measures to assess flood risk perceptions, offering multiple pathways for targeted interventions and flood risk communication.

Coastal communities across the world face intense and frequent flooding due to the rise in extreme rainfall and storm surges associated with climate change. Adaptation is therefore crucial to manage the growing threat to coastal communities and cities. This case study focuses on Lagos, Nigeria, one of the world's largest urban centers where rapid urbanization, poor urban planning, degrading infrastructure, and inadequate preparedness compounds flood vulnerability. We situate flood risk perceptions within the context of climate-induced mobilities in Lagos, which no study has done, filling a necessary knowledge gap. Furthermore, we apply a unique approach to flood risk perception and its linkage to migration, by using three measures of risk – affect, probability, and consequence, as opposed to a singular measure. Results show that the affect measure of flood risk perception is significantly higher than probability and consequence measures. Furthermore, flood risk perception is shaped by prior experiences with flooding and proximity to hazard. The effect of proximity on risk perception differs across the three measures. We also found that flood risk perceptions and future migration intentions are positively correlated. These results demonstrate the usefulness of using multiple measures to assess flood risk perceptions, offering multiple pathways for targeted interventions and flood risk communication.

Coastal communities across the world face intense and frequent flooding due to the rise in extreme rainfall and storm surges associated with climate change. Adaptation is therefore crucial to manage the growing threat to coastal communities and cities. This case study focuses on Lagos, Nigeria, one of the world's largest urban centers where rapid urbanization, poor urban planning, degrading infrastructure, and inadequate preparedness compounds flood vulnerability. We situate flood risk perceptions within the context of climate-induced mobilities in Lagos, which no study has done, filling a necessary knowledge gap. Furthermore, we apply a unique approach to flood risk perception and its linkage to migration, by using three measures of risk – affect, probability, and consequence, as opposed to a singular measure. Results show that the affect measure of flood risk perception is significantly higher than probability and consequence measures. Furthermore, flood risk perception is shaped by prior experiences with flooding and proximity to hazard. The effect of proximity on risk perception differs across the three measures. We also found that flood risk perceptions and future migration intentions are positively correlated. These results demonstrate the usefulness of using multiple measures to assess flood risk perceptions, offering multiple pathways for targeted interventions and flood risk communication.