Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

During the first ‘Finance in Common Summit’, in November 2020, public development banks (PDBs) from around the world committed to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While there is increasing interest in mainstreaming the SDGs, we still lack an open and deeper discussion of what that means. As a consequence, there is as yet no broad-based ambitious operational approach. The present study is the product of a European Think Tanks Group (ETTG) collaboration aiming both to propose a definition of SDG alignment and to provide concrete principles to further operationalise and promote such alignment in practice. To align with the multidimensional scope of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs, PDBs must incorporate the imperative of the transition to low-carbon, climate-resilient and equitable socio-economic models in all their financing decisions and project cycles. Up to now, many SDG alignment discussions have been limited to mapping exercises. Some actors perceive “SDG investments” as equivalent to infrastructure investments, without questioning whether infrastructures are designed sustainably. The present study applies a much deeper comprehension of the 2030 Agenda, arguing that alignment with the Paris Agreement and SDGs must go hand in hand. Implementing the 2030 Agenda requires PDBs to ensure coherence and spur a profound change on the scale of the entire PDB organisation and across its full range of operations. As such, SDG alignment demands high-level commitment, together with deep governance and, probably, business model restructuring. However, moving from a clear understanding of the 2030 Agenda to a truly operational approach is no easy task. Hence, this study develops four operationalisation principles, along with practical steps to implement them. Together, these provide a guiding checklist for PDBs’ efforts to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and SDGs.

During the first ‘Finance in Common Summit’, in November 2020, public development banks (PDBs) from around the world committed to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While there is increasing interest in mainstreaming the SDGs, we still lack an open and deeper discussion of what that means. As a consequence, there is as yet no broad-based ambitious operational approach. The present study is the product of a European Think Tanks Group (ETTG) collaboration aiming both to propose a definition of SDG alignment and to provide concrete principles to further operationalise and promote such alignment in practice. To align with the multidimensional scope of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs, PDBs must incorporate the imperative of the transition to low-carbon, climate-resilient and equitable socio-economic models in all their financing decisions and project cycles. Up to now, many SDG alignment discussions have been limited to mapping exercises. Some actors perceive “SDG investments” as equivalent to infrastructure investments, without questioning whether infrastructures are designed sustainably. The present study applies a much deeper comprehension of the 2030 Agenda, arguing that alignment with the Paris Agreement and SDGs must go hand in hand. Implementing the 2030 Agenda requires PDBs to ensure coherence and spur a profound change on the scale of the entire PDB organisation and across its full range of operations. As such, SDG alignment demands high-level commitment, together with deep governance and, probably, business model restructuring. However, moving from a clear understanding of the 2030 Agenda to a truly operational approach is no easy task. Hence, this study develops four operationalisation principles, along with practical steps to implement them. Together, these provide a guiding checklist for PDBs’ efforts to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and SDGs.

During the first ‘Finance in Common Summit’, in November 2020, public development banks (PDBs) from around the world committed to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While there is increasing interest in mainstreaming the SDGs, we still lack an open and deeper discussion of what that means. As a consequence, there is as yet no broad-based ambitious operational approach. The present study is the product of a European Think Tanks Group (ETTG) collaboration aiming both to propose a definition of SDG alignment and to provide concrete principles to further operationalise and promote such alignment in practice. To align with the multidimensional scope of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs, PDBs must incorporate the imperative of the transition to low-carbon, climate-resilient and equitable socio-economic models in all their financing decisions and project cycles. Up to now, many SDG alignment discussions have been limited to mapping exercises. Some actors perceive “SDG investments” as equivalent to infrastructure investments, without questioning whether infrastructures are designed sustainably. The present study applies a much deeper comprehension of the 2030 Agenda, arguing that alignment with the Paris Agreement and SDGs must go hand in hand. Implementing the 2030 Agenda requires PDBs to ensure coherence and spur a profound change on the scale of the entire PDB organisation and across its full range of operations. As such, SDG alignment demands high-level commitment, together with deep governance and, probably, business model restructuring. However, moving from a clear understanding of the 2030 Agenda to a truly operational approach is no easy task. Hence, this study develops four operationalisation principles, along with practical steps to implement them. Together, these provide a guiding checklist for PDBs’ efforts to align their activities with the 2030 Agenda and SDGs.

The conventional economics literature equates welfare with consumption-based utility, neglecting the psychological effects of uncertainty and fear of the future on well-being. In this study, we examine how food insecurity relates to changes in subjective well-being within a comparative analysis across different country groups between 2005 and 2018 and find that food insecurity matters to well-being. We also examine the relationship between experienced food insecurity and well-being, taking into account any potential endogeneity. In low-income, food-deficient, food-importing and drought-affected countries, changes in the prevalence of undernourishment explain a great deal of the variation in subjective well-being over time.

The conventional economics literature equates welfare with consumption-based utility, neglecting the psychological effects of uncertainty and fear of the future on well-being. In this study, we examine how food insecurity relates to changes in subjective well-being within a comparative analysis across different country groups between 2005 and 2018 and find that food insecurity matters to well-being. We also examine the relationship between experienced food insecurity and well-being, taking into account any potential endogeneity. In low-income, food-deficient, food-importing and drought-affected countries, changes in the prevalence of undernourishment explain a great deal of the variation in subjective well-being over time.

The conventional economics literature equates welfare with consumption-based utility, neglecting the psychological effects of uncertainty and fear of the future on well-being. In this study, we examine how food insecurity relates to changes in subjective well-being within a comparative analysis across different country groups between 2005 and 2018 and find that food insecurity matters to well-being. We also examine the relationship between experienced food insecurity and well-being, taking into account any potential endogeneity. In low-income, food-deficient, food-importing and drought-affected countries, changes in the prevalence of undernourishment explain a great deal of the variation in subjective well-being over time.

The Technical Expert Group on Comprehensive Risk Management (TEG-CRM) – established in 2019 under the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) – developed its Plan of Action (PoA) as an essential element of a five-year rolling workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. The PoA supports the implementation of activities under strategic workstream (c) on enhanced cooperation and facilitation in relation to comprehensive risk management approaches. Both workplans acknowledge social protection as a distinct risk management instrument. This briefing paper supports the implementation of the TEG-CRM PoA and the workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. Its objectives are to highlight policy gaps on using social protection to support loss and damage action (at the national level), and to define key capacity-building needs in developing countries. The brief further seeks to: i) recommend priorities for strengthening national social protection systems with the view to minimizing, averting and addressing residual loss and damage associated with climate extremes and slow onset changes; and ii) inform the future work on social protection by the TEG-CRM and, more broadly, that of the thematic expert groups established under the WIM.

The Technical Expert Group on Comprehensive Risk Management (TEG-CRM) – established in 2019 under the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) – developed its Plan of Action (PoA) as an essential element of a five-year rolling workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. The PoA supports the implementation of activities under strategic workstream (c) on enhanced cooperation and facilitation in relation to comprehensive risk management approaches. Both workplans acknowledge social protection as a distinct risk management instrument. This briefing paper supports the implementation of the TEG-CRM PoA and the workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. Its objectives are to highlight policy gaps on using social protection to support loss and damage action (at the national level), and to define key capacity-building needs in developing countries. The brief further seeks to: i) recommend priorities for strengthening national social protection systems with the view to minimizing, averting and addressing residual loss and damage associated with climate extremes and slow onset changes; and ii) inform the future work on social protection by the TEG-CRM and, more broadly, that of the thematic expert groups established under the WIM.

The Technical Expert Group on Comprehensive Risk Management (TEG-CRM) – established in 2019 under the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM) – developed its Plan of Action (PoA) as an essential element of a five-year rolling workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. The PoA supports the implementation of activities under strategic workstream (c) on enhanced cooperation and facilitation in relation to comprehensive risk management approaches. Both workplans acknowledge social protection as a distinct risk management instrument. This briefing paper supports the implementation of the TEG-CRM PoA and the workplan of the Executive Committee of the WIM. Its objectives are to highlight policy gaps on using social protection to support loss and damage action (at the national level), and to define key capacity-building needs in developing countries. The brief further seeks to: i) recommend priorities for strengthening national social protection systems with the view to minimizing, averting and addressing residual loss and damage associated with climate extremes and slow onset changes; and ii) inform the future work on social protection by the TEG-CRM and, more broadly, that of the thematic expert groups established under the WIM.

This paper assesses the preferences of EU institutions and member states for the Union’s development policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing both the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss and the exacerbating socio-economic inequalities requires a response that links the short-term recovery of the pandemic with longer-term socio-ecological transformations. Our findings show that the EU and its member states have mainly responded to that challenge through Team Europe and Team Europe Initiatives. While these have contributed to defining a joint European response to the pandemic, the strong focus on climate and green transitions and the lack of connections to the broader SDG agenda as well as social and human development have created tensions between some member states and the EU. A key challenge ahead in further defining the European response to the pandemic is finding new strategic directions and operational means for bridging these differing priorities.

This paper assesses the preferences of EU institutions and member states for the Union’s development policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing both the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss and the exacerbating socio-economic inequalities requires a response that links the short-term recovery of the pandemic with longer-term socio-ecological transformations. Our findings show that the EU and its member states have mainly responded to that challenge through Team Europe and Team Europe Initiatives. While these have contributed to defining a joint European response to the pandemic, the strong focus on climate and green transitions and the lack of connections to the broader SDG agenda as well as social and human development have created tensions between some member states and the EU. A key challenge ahead in further defining the European response to the pandemic is finding new strategic directions and operational means for bridging these differing priorities.

This paper assesses the preferences of EU institutions and member states for the Union’s development policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing both the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss and the exacerbating socio-economic inequalities requires a response that links the short-term recovery of the pandemic with longer-term socio-ecological transformations. Our findings show that the EU and its member states have mainly responded to that challenge through Team Europe and Team Europe Initiatives. While these have contributed to defining a joint European response to the pandemic, the strong focus on climate and green transitions and the lack of connections to the broader SDG agenda as well as social and human development have created tensions between some member states and the EU. A key challenge ahead in further defining the European response to the pandemic is finding new strategic directions and operational means for bridging these differing priorities.

Das Statistische Bundesamt hat die vorläufige Inflationsrate für September in Höhe von 4,1 Prozent bestätigt. Damit lag die Inflationsrate so hoch wie seit Dezember 1993 nicht mehr. Dazu ein Statement von Marcel Fratzscher, Präsident des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin):

4,1 Prozent klingt nach einer höheren Inflation, als sie in Wahrheit ist. Denn im September sind die Preise im Vergleich zum August und zum Juli nicht gestiegen, sondern konstant geblieben. Die höhere Zahl ist vor allem das Resultat so genannter Basiseffekte, also der Tatsache, dass im gleichen Zeitraum im vergangenen Jahr die Preise gefallen sind. Die Preise fossiler Energieträger wie Öl und Gas werden auch in Zukunft weiter steigen. Das ist gut so, denn dies gehört zu einer klugen Strategie in Sachen Klimaschutz dazu. Die Politik sollte Menschen mit geringen Einkommen gezielt finanziell entlasten, aber nicht TopverdienerInnen oder Unternehmen. Die Inflation wird im kommenden Jahr in Deutschland mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit eher zu gering als zu hoch ausfallen. Eine dauerhaft hohe Inflation ist sehr unwahrscheinlich und wäre eher ein Luxus-Problem, denn dies würde eine dauerhaft boomende Wirtschaft erfordern. Es gibt daher keinen Anlass zur Angst und die Politik sollte sich an populistischer Angstmache nicht beteiligen.

Event Video 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-ylxozb").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-ylxozb").fadeIn(300);});});

On October 12th, IPI hosted a Global Leaders Series event featuring H.E. Hon. Uhuru Kenyatta, President of the Republic of Kenya.

The talk responded to the major challenges highlighted in the United Nations Secretary General’s Our Common Agenda report. President Kenyatta discussed how global cooperation and multilateralism can be deployed effectively to solve the major interlinked climate, security, economic and public health challenges that threaten so many around the world. He also shared his insights on the worldwide challenge of building and sustaining states that have the ability to solve major challenges, including the maintenance of cohesion, peace and security.

His Excellency President Hon. Uhuru Kenyatta, C.G.H., is the fourth President of the Republic of Kenya and the party leader of the ruling Jubilee Party.

He has previously served as a nominated Member of Parliament, Leader of the Opposition, Minister for Local Government and Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.

President Kenyatta was re-elected for a second and final term in August 2017. His presidency has been underpinned by a commitment to economic and social transformation, national unity, good governance, regional integration, and intra-Africa trade.

Under President Kenyatta’s leadership, Kenya has become one of the fastest-growing economies in sub-Saharan Africa and ranks among the top three African countries on the ease of doing business. Kenya has consolidated its position as a leader on issues such as Climate Change, the Blue Economy and digital technologies and Nairobi has emerged as a regional hub for major international organizations and corporations. Kenya. In January 2021, Kenya started its two-year term as an elected member of the United Nations Security Council.

Following the promulgation of a new Constitution in 2010, President Kenyatta presided over the rolling out of an ambitious program to restructure the Kenyan state involving large-scale political, fiscal, and administrative decentralization.

At the regional level, President Kenyatta has championed regional integration, intra-Africa trade, and a stronger role of the African continent on the global stage. He has been at the forefront in promoting peace and security efforts in the region and has brokered peace agreements in South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

President Kenyatta has Chaired the African Union Peace and Security Council in March of 2021 and is the current Chair of the Summit of East Africa Community Heads of State. He is also Chair of the African Leaders Malaria Alliance (ALMA) a coalition of African Union Heads of State and Government to drive accountability and action for results against Malaria, Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs), Reproductive, Maternal, Neonatal, Child, and Adolescent Health (RMNCAH) and nutrition.

President Kenyatta is the current President-in-Office of the Organization of the African, Caribbean and Pacific States (OACPS) which comprises 79 African, Caribbean, and Pacific states. He is also a member of the High-Level Panel for Sustainable Ocean Economy, a unique initiative of 14 serving world leaders to build momentum towards a sustainable ocean economy.

President Kenyatta serves as a Global Leader for the Young People’s Agenda under the UN-led Generation Unlimited Initiative (GenU) which seeks to ensure that by 2030 all young persons aged 10-24 are in school, in training or employment.

This event was moderated by Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, President and CEO of IPI.

Deutschland soll sich für die Finanzierung von Wissenschaft in Partnerschaft mit wissenschaftlichen Institutionen und Partnern in Afrika aussprechen, sagt Anna-Katharina Hornidge im Interview mit Klaus Bernhard Hofmann. Sie betont auch, dass ein Erfolg der Energiewende nur möglich ist, wenn ein Teil der erneuerbaren Energien importiert werde. (Grüner Wasserstoff könne eine wichtige Rolle spielen.)

Deutschland soll sich für die Finanzierung von Wissenschaft in Partnerschaft mit wissenschaftlichen Institutionen und Partnern in Afrika aussprechen, sagt Anna-Katharina Hornidge im Interview mit Klaus Bernhard Hofmann. Sie betont auch, dass ein Erfolg der Energiewende nur möglich ist, wenn ein Teil der erneuerbaren Energien importiert werde. (Grüner Wasserstoff könne eine wichtige Rolle spielen.)