Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Universality is one of the key novel characteristics of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. By applying a functional approach to external policies, this chapter challenges traditional notions of development cooperation and shows that the agenda’s means of implementation as well as their application are lopsided towards so-called developing countries. However, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals critically depends on the agenda’s implementation also within the so-called developed countries as well as between them. Therefore, the function of development cooperation to shape conditions within other countries by using cooperative and promotional instruments should be exerted also vis-à-vis “developed countries”. International cooperation for sustainable development needs to become universal, multimodal, mutual, and transformative if it wants to deliver change, not aid.

Universality is one of the key novel characteristics of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. By applying a functional approach to external policies, this chapter challenges traditional notions of development cooperation and shows that the agenda’s means of implementation as well as their application are lopsided towards so-called developing countries. However, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals critically depends on the agenda’s implementation also within the so-called developed countries as well as between them. Therefore, the function of development cooperation to shape conditions within other countries by using cooperative and promotional instruments should be exerted also vis-à-vis “developed countries”. International cooperation for sustainable development needs to become universal, multimodal, mutual, and transformative if it wants to deliver change, not aid.

Universality is one of the key novel characteristics of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. By applying a functional approach to external policies, this chapter challenges traditional notions of development cooperation and shows that the agenda’s means of implementation as well as their application are lopsided towards so-called developing countries. However, achieving the Sustainable Development Goals critically depends on the agenda’s implementation also within the so-called developed countries as well as between them. Therefore, the function of development cooperation to shape conditions within other countries by using cooperative and promotional instruments should be exerted also vis-à-vis “developed countries”. International cooperation for sustainable development needs to become universal, multimodal, mutual, and transformative if it wants to deliver change, not aid.

Development cooperation (DC) is shaped by norms. We aim at filling a gap of research on DC by using the academic debates in international relations on norms. Contrary to interpretations that consider developed countries as norm-makers and developing countries as norm-takers, our analysis provides evidence that—and highlights how—Southern agents have influenced the processes of norm-setting and norm-diffusion for DC. The OECD was the dominant norms “entrepreneur” for a long period of time; more recently, developing countries have played a significant role in setting DC norms. We identify the diverging norms for official development assistance and South-South cooperation and the interrelationship between both norm systems. Thus, norm-making, norm-taking, and norm-diffusion of two competing norm clusters are key terms of the contribution.

Development cooperation (DC) is shaped by norms. We aim at filling a gap of research on DC by using the academic debates in international relations on norms. Contrary to interpretations that consider developed countries as norm-makers and developing countries as norm-takers, our analysis provides evidence that—and highlights how—Southern agents have influenced the processes of norm-setting and norm-diffusion for DC. The OECD was the dominant norms “entrepreneur” for a long period of time; more recently, developing countries have played a significant role in setting DC norms. We identify the diverging norms for official development assistance and South-South cooperation and the interrelationship between both norm systems. Thus, norm-making, norm-taking, and norm-diffusion of two competing norm clusters are key terms of the contribution.

Development cooperation (DC) is shaped by norms. We aim at filling a gap of research on DC by using the academic debates in international relations on norms. Contrary to interpretations that consider developed countries as norm-makers and developing countries as norm-takers, our analysis provides evidence that—and highlights how—Southern agents have influenced the processes of norm-setting and norm-diffusion for DC. The OECD was the dominant norms “entrepreneur” for a long period of time; more recently, developing countries have played a significant role in setting DC norms. We identify the diverging norms for official development assistance and South-South cooperation and the interrelationship between both norm systems. Thus, norm-making, norm-taking, and norm-diffusion of two competing norm clusters are key terms of the contribution.

This chapter analyses the development discourse on foreign aid to explore areas of convergence between the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors and Chinese development cooperation. We apply the concept of “coalition magnets”—the capacity of an idea to appeal to a diverse set of individuals and groups, and to be used strategically by policy entrepreneurs to frame interests, mobilise support, and build coalitions. Three coalition magnets are identified: mutual benefit, development results, and the 2030 Agenda. The chapter finds that coalition magnets can be used to influence political change and concludes that applying a discursive approach provides a new conceptual opportunity for fostering closer engagement between OECD-DAC and Chinese development cooperation actors.

This chapter analyses the development discourse on foreign aid to explore areas of convergence between the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors and Chinese development cooperation. We apply the concept of “coalition magnets”—the capacity of an idea to appeal to a diverse set of individuals and groups, and to be used strategically by policy entrepreneurs to frame interests, mobilise support, and build coalitions. Three coalition magnets are identified: mutual benefit, development results, and the 2030 Agenda. The chapter finds that coalition magnets can be used to influence political change and concludes that applying a discursive approach provides a new conceptual opportunity for fostering closer engagement between OECD-DAC and Chinese development cooperation actors.

This chapter analyses the development discourse on foreign aid to explore areas of convergence between the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors and Chinese development cooperation. We apply the concept of “coalition magnets”—the capacity of an idea to appeal to a diverse set of individuals and groups, and to be used strategically by policy entrepreneurs to frame interests, mobilise support, and build coalitions. Three coalition magnets are identified: mutual benefit, development results, and the 2030 Agenda. The chapter finds that coalition magnets can be used to influence political change and concludes that applying a discursive approach provides a new conceptual opportunity for fostering closer engagement between OECD-DAC and Chinese development cooperation actors.

Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires significant behavioural changes from a variety of actors, including actors in development cooperation. Within this context, this chapter discusses important political as well as technical factors that influence the contribution of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) and its monitoring framework to the implementation of the SDGs. These are, among other things, the complementarity of the GPEDC monitoring framework to the SDGs; the limited enthusiasm of development partners from the Global South, in particular China and India; the limited attention paid to the platform in general and the monitoring framework in particular by member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); as well as the missing interpretative evaluations and follow-up processes in the aftermath of the respective monitoring rounds.

Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires significant behavioural changes from a variety of actors, including actors in development cooperation. Within this context, this chapter discusses important political as well as technical factors that influence the contribution of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) and its monitoring framework to the implementation of the SDGs. These are, among other things, the complementarity of the GPEDC monitoring framework to the SDGs; the limited enthusiasm of development partners from the Global South, in particular China and India; the limited attention paid to the platform in general and the monitoring framework in particular by member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); as well as the missing interpretative evaluations and follow-up processes in the aftermath of the respective monitoring rounds.

Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires significant behavioural changes from a variety of actors, including actors in development cooperation. Within this context, this chapter discusses important political as well as technical factors that influence the contribution of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) and its monitoring framework to the implementation of the SDGs. These are, among other things, the complementarity of the GPEDC monitoring framework to the SDGs; the limited enthusiasm of development partners from the Global South, in particular China and India; the limited attention paid to the platform in general and the monitoring framework in particular by member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); as well as the missing interpretative evaluations and follow-up processes in the aftermath of the respective monitoring rounds.

Partnerships with private-sector actors are widely considered crucial for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, but the ways of how to engage best with actors from the private sector in development cooperation are contested. Often it is feared that influential companies will hijack unregulated partnership initiatives for their own benefits. This chapter investigates different levels of engagement for partnerships with private-sector actors and discusses how they can be more successful. We show that it matters whether it is envisioned to incentivise and regulate private-sector engagement at the global or at the country level. The chapter’s main findings support context-specific approaches and emphasise the need to strengthen national development agencies as focal points for private-sector engagement in development cooperation.

Partnerships with private-sector actors are widely considered crucial for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, but the ways of how to engage best with actors from the private sector in development cooperation are contested. Often it is feared that influential companies will hijack unregulated partnership initiatives for their own benefits. This chapter investigates different levels of engagement for partnerships with private-sector actors and discusses how they can be more successful. We show that it matters whether it is envisioned to incentivise and regulate private-sector engagement at the global or at the country level. The chapter’s main findings support context-specific approaches and emphasise the need to strengthen national development agencies as focal points for private-sector engagement in development cooperation.

Partnerships with private-sector actors are widely considered crucial for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, but the ways of how to engage best with actors from the private sector in development cooperation are contested. Often it is feared that influential companies will hijack unregulated partnership initiatives for their own benefits. This chapter investigates different levels of engagement for partnerships with private-sector actors and discusses how they can be more successful. We show that it matters whether it is envisioned to incentivise and regulate private-sector engagement at the global or at the country level. The chapter’s main findings support context-specific approaches and emphasise the need to strengthen national development agencies as focal points for private-sector engagement in development cooperation.

This chapter provides an overview of how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled towards achieving the 2030 Agenda based on the overall handbook. Drawing on key insights from different handbook chapters, we recap the narratives and norms that are shaping development cooperation, highlight the existing as well as new institutional sites of contestations, and provide examples of how international governance structures can enhance collaboration and cooperation. Looking forward, we conclude that researchers should continue to explore the duality of contestation and cooperation, as it is key to understanding and shaping the policy field of development cooperation.

This chapter provides an overview of how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled towards achieving the 2030 Agenda based on the overall handbook. Drawing on key insights from different handbook chapters, we recap the narratives and norms that are shaping development cooperation, highlight the existing as well as new institutional sites of contestations, and provide examples of how international governance structures can enhance collaboration and cooperation. Looking forward, we conclude that researchers should continue to explore the duality of contestation and cooperation, as it is key to understanding and shaping the policy field of development cooperation.

This chapter provides an overview of how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled towards achieving the 2030 Agenda based on the overall handbook. Drawing on key insights from different handbook chapters, we recap the narratives and norms that are shaping development cooperation, highlight the existing as well as new institutional sites of contestations, and provide examples of how international governance structures can enhance collaboration and cooperation. Looking forward, we conclude that researchers should continue to explore the duality of contestation and cooperation, as it is key to understanding and shaping the policy field of development cooperation.

Die im Juni 2017 verabschiedeten Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ sind ein strategischer Kompass für das friedenspolitische Engagement der Bundesregierung. Ziel dieser Studie ist es einzuordnen, inwiefern das friedenspolitische Leitbild und der Anspruch friedenspolitischer Kohärenz in den afrikapolitischen Strategien der Bundes-regierung umgesetzt werden. Der inhaltliche Fokus liegt auf der Analyse der Strategiedokumente. Auf dieser Grundlage wird geprüft, ob und wie sich friedenspolitische Kohärenz in den politischen Strategien zur Kooperation mit Afrika widerspiegelt. Die Studie versteht friedenspolitische Kohärenz als das Zusammenwirken von Politiken in Bezug auf das übergeordnete Ziel der Förderung nachhaltigen Friedens im Sinne der Leitlinien.
Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie ist, dass sich die Kernbestandteile des friedenspolitischen Leitbilds der Bundesregierung nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wiederfinden. Aus dieser Diskrepanz heraus stellt sich die grundsätzliche Frage, welche strategische Funktion das friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung erfüllen sollte und wie es als strategischer Kompass für regionalspezifische Strategien und konkretes Regierungshandeln wie im Falle der deutschen Afrikapolitik operationalisiert werden kann. Auf der Grundlage der Analyse empfiehlt die Studie daher, einen Verständigungsprozess der Ressorts darüber anzustoßen, wie das friedenspolitische Leitbild auf der strategischen und regierungspraktischen Ebene umgesetzt werden kann und für welche Prinzipien des friedenspolitischen Leitbildes eine weitere Konkretisierung notwendig ist. Um dem Primat der Krisenprävention gerecht zu werden, müsste auch ein klareres Verständnis der Inhalte der Krisenprävention, geeigneter Präventionsmittel und ihres strategischen Einsatzes entwickelt werden. Dies könnte auch zu einer klareren Arbeitsteilung und einer Effektivitätssteigerung des ressortgemeinsamen Handelns der Bundesregierung in unterschiedlichen Kontexten beitragen.

Die im Juni 2017 verabschiedeten Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ sind ein strategischer Kompass für das friedenspolitische Engagement der Bundesregierung. Ziel dieser Studie ist es einzuordnen, inwiefern das friedenspolitische Leitbild und der Anspruch friedenspolitischer Kohärenz in den afrikapolitischen Strategien der Bundes-regierung umgesetzt werden. Der inhaltliche Fokus liegt auf der Analyse der Strategiedokumente. Auf dieser Grundlage wird geprüft, ob und wie sich friedenspolitische Kohärenz in den politischen Strategien zur Kooperation mit Afrika widerspiegelt. Die Studie versteht friedenspolitische Kohärenz als das Zusammenwirken von Politiken in Bezug auf das übergeordnete Ziel der Förderung nachhaltigen Friedens im Sinne der Leitlinien.
Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie ist, dass sich die Kernbestandteile des friedenspolitischen Leitbilds der Bundesregierung nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wiederfinden. Aus dieser Diskrepanz heraus stellt sich die grundsätzliche Frage, welche strategische Funktion das friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung erfüllen sollte und wie es als strategischer Kompass für regionalspezifische Strategien und konkretes Regierungshandeln wie im Falle der deutschen Afrikapolitik operationalisiert werden kann. Auf der Grundlage der Analyse empfiehlt die Studie daher, einen Verständigungsprozess der Ressorts darüber anzustoßen, wie das friedenspolitische Leitbild auf der strategischen und regierungspraktischen Ebene umgesetzt werden kann und für welche Prinzipien des friedenspolitischen Leitbildes eine weitere Konkretisierung notwendig ist. Um dem Primat der Krisenprävention gerecht zu werden, müsste auch ein klareres Verständnis der Inhalte der Krisenprävention, geeigneter Präventionsmittel und ihres strategischen Einsatzes entwickelt werden. Dies könnte auch zu einer klareren Arbeitsteilung und einer Effektivitätssteigerung des ressortgemeinsamen Handelns der Bundesregierung in unterschiedlichen Kontexten beitragen.