Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Seit 2016 ist Deutschland nach den Vereinigten Staaten der zweitgrößte Beitragszahler zum Entwicklungssystem der Vereinten Nationen (UNDS). Der größte Anstieg der deutschen Mittel entfällt auf zweckgebundene Beiträge, d.h. auf Mittel mit vorab festgelegten geographischen und thematischen Zielen. Die Finanzierung humanitärer Organisationen wie der Flüchtlingsorganisation (UNHCR), des Welternährungsprogramms (WFP) und des Kinderhilfswerks (UNICEF) der Vereinten Nationen macht den Großteil der deutschen Beiträge aus. Aber auch die entwicklungsbezogenen Mittel für das Entwicklungsprogramm (UNDP), den Bevölkerungsfonds (UNFPA) und UN Women stiegen stark an. In jüngster Zeit haben auch die Kernbeiträge, die von multilateralen Organisationen mit größerem Ermessensspielraum genutzt werden können, zugenommen, vor allem im Rahmen der Corona-Nothilfe (COVID-19).
Die deutliche Zunahme signalisiert, dass Deutschland auch in Krisenzeiten Vertrauen in die UN setzt und ihnen eine große Bedeutung beimisst. Es ist jetzt an der Zeit, dass Deutschland sein strategisches Interesse an einem starken und effektiven UNDS, das seine Außenpolitik in den Bereichen Stabilisierung, Wiederaufbau, Flucht und Migration und Klima stärken kann, ausdrücklicher anerkennt. Durch multilaterale Organisationen können Staaten mehr erreichen als allein. Zweckgebundene Mittel haben dem UNDS zwar geholfen, seine Handlungsfähigkeit und seinen Wirkungsbereich zu erweitern. Häufig haben sie aber viele negative Auswirkungen in Hinblick auf Effizienz, Effektivität und Legitimität.
Zweckbindung ist aufgrund des Verwaltungsaufwands auch mit direkten Kosten für deutsche Ministerien verbunden. Zudem agiert die Bundesregierung gegenüber dem UNDS uneinheitlich; es gibt Differenzen zwischen und innerhalb von Ministerien und Durchführungsorganisationen.
Für Deutschland bringt die herausgehobene Position als zweitgrößter Beitragszahler zum UNDS Verantwortung und Chancen mit sich, insbesondere in einer Zeit, in der der größte Geldgeber seine Finanzierung zurücknimmt. Um ein wirksamer Befürworter von Multilateralismus zu sein, muss die Bundesregierung ihr eigenes Haus in Ordnung bringen.
• Sie sollte ihre Allokationsentscheidungen als ein Mittel zur Stärkung des Multilateralismus und zur Unterstützung von UN-Reformen betrachten und zu diesem Zweck auf eine ausgewogenere Finanzierungsmischung mit größeren Anteilen flexibler Mittel hinarbeiten.
• Sie sollte ihr verstärktes Engagement im UNDS gegenüber der deutschen Öffentlichkeit deutlicher kommunizieren und begründen und die Kohärenz ihrer multilateralen Bemühungen erhöhen.
• Sie sollte die versteckten Kosten abschätzen, die beim Einsatz von Durchführungsorganisationen entstehen, und interne Zweckbindungsrichtlinien im Einklang mit den im Rahmen des Grand Bargain (2016) und des UN Funding Compact (2019) eingegangenen Verpflichtungen verbessern.
• Sie sollte die kürzlich angehobenen Kernbeiträge für die UN-Entwicklungsorganisationen festschreiben, die strategische Bedeutung von Kernbeiträgen anerkennen und auch verstärkt auf weichere Formen zweckgebundener Finanzierungen zurückgreifen.

Seit 2016 ist Deutschland nach den Vereinigten Staaten der zweitgrößte Beitragszahler zum Entwicklungssystem der Vereinten Nationen (UNDS). Der größte Anstieg der deutschen Mittel entfällt auf zweckgebundene Beiträge, d.h. auf Mittel mit vorab festgelegten geographischen und thematischen Zielen. Die Finanzierung humanitärer Organisationen wie der Flüchtlingsorganisation (UNHCR), des Welternährungsprogramms (WFP) und des Kinderhilfswerks (UNICEF) der Vereinten Nationen macht den Großteil der deutschen Beiträge aus. Aber auch die entwicklungsbezogenen Mittel für das Entwicklungsprogramm (UNDP), den Bevölkerungsfonds (UNFPA) und UN Women stiegen stark an. In jüngster Zeit haben auch die Kernbeiträge, die von multilateralen Organisationen mit größerem Ermessensspielraum genutzt werden können, zugenommen, vor allem im Rahmen der Corona-Nothilfe (COVID-19).
Die deutliche Zunahme signalisiert, dass Deutschland auch in Krisenzeiten Vertrauen in die UN setzt und ihnen eine große Bedeutung beimisst. Es ist jetzt an der Zeit, dass Deutschland sein strategisches Interesse an einem starken und effektiven UNDS, das seine Außenpolitik in den Bereichen Stabilisierung, Wiederaufbau, Flucht und Migration und Klima stärken kann, ausdrücklicher anerkennt. Durch multilaterale Organisationen können Staaten mehr erreichen als allein. Zweckgebundene Mittel haben dem UNDS zwar geholfen, seine Handlungsfähigkeit und seinen Wirkungsbereich zu erweitern. Häufig haben sie aber viele negative Auswirkungen in Hinblick auf Effizienz, Effektivität und Legitimität.
Zweckbindung ist aufgrund des Verwaltungsaufwands auch mit direkten Kosten für deutsche Ministerien verbunden. Zudem agiert die Bundesregierung gegenüber dem UNDS uneinheitlich; es gibt Differenzen zwischen und innerhalb von Ministerien und Durchführungsorganisationen.
Für Deutschland bringt die herausgehobene Position als zweitgrößter Beitragszahler zum UNDS Verantwortung und Chancen mit sich, insbesondere in einer Zeit, in der der größte Geldgeber seine Finanzierung zurücknimmt. Um ein wirksamer Befürworter von Multilateralismus zu sein, muss die Bundesregierung ihr eigenes Haus in Ordnung bringen.
• Sie sollte ihre Allokationsentscheidungen als ein Mittel zur Stärkung des Multilateralismus und zur Unterstützung von UN-Reformen betrachten und zu diesem Zweck auf eine ausgewogenere Finanzierungsmischung mit größeren Anteilen flexibler Mittel hinarbeiten.
• Sie sollte ihr verstärktes Engagement im UNDS gegenüber der deutschen Öffentlichkeit deutlicher kommunizieren und begründen und die Kohärenz ihrer multilateralen Bemühungen erhöhen.
• Sie sollte die versteckten Kosten abschätzen, die beim Einsatz von Durchführungsorganisationen entstehen, und interne Zweckbindungsrichtlinien im Einklang mit den im Rahmen des Grand Bargain (2016) und des UN Funding Compact (2019) eingegangenen Verpflichtungen verbessern.
• Sie sollte die kürzlich angehobenen Kernbeiträge für die UN-Entwicklungsorganisationen festschreiben, die strategische Bedeutung von Kernbeiträgen anerkennen und auch verstärkt auf weichere Formen zweckgebundener Finanzierungen zurückgreifen.

Seit 2016 ist Deutschland nach den Vereinigten Staaten der zweitgrößte Beitragszahler zum Entwicklungssystem der Vereinten Nationen (UNDS). Der größte Anstieg der deutschen Mittel entfällt auf zweckgebundene Beiträge, d.h. auf Mittel mit vorab festgelegten geographischen und thematischen Zielen. Die Finanzierung humanitärer Organisationen wie der Flüchtlingsorganisation (UNHCR), des Welternährungsprogramms (WFP) und des Kinderhilfswerks (UNICEF) der Vereinten Nationen macht den Großteil der deutschen Beiträge aus. Aber auch die entwicklungsbezogenen Mittel für das Entwicklungsprogramm (UNDP), den Bevölkerungsfonds (UNFPA) und UN Women stiegen stark an. In jüngster Zeit haben auch die Kernbeiträge, die von multilateralen Organisationen mit größerem Ermessensspielraum genutzt werden können, zugenommen, vor allem im Rahmen der Corona-Nothilfe (COVID-19).
Die deutliche Zunahme signalisiert, dass Deutschland auch in Krisenzeiten Vertrauen in die UN setzt und ihnen eine große Bedeutung beimisst. Es ist jetzt an der Zeit, dass Deutschland sein strategisches Interesse an einem starken und effektiven UNDS, das seine Außenpolitik in den Bereichen Stabilisierung, Wiederaufbau, Flucht und Migration und Klima stärken kann, ausdrücklicher anerkennt. Durch multilaterale Organisationen können Staaten mehr erreichen als allein. Zweckgebundene Mittel haben dem UNDS zwar geholfen, seine Handlungsfähigkeit und seinen Wirkungsbereich zu erweitern. Häufig haben sie aber viele negative Auswirkungen in Hinblick auf Effizienz, Effektivität und Legitimität.
Zweckbindung ist aufgrund des Verwaltungsaufwands auch mit direkten Kosten für deutsche Ministerien verbunden. Zudem agiert die Bundesregierung gegenüber dem UNDS uneinheitlich; es gibt Differenzen zwischen und innerhalb von Ministerien und Durchführungsorganisationen.
Für Deutschland bringt die herausgehobene Position als zweitgrößter Beitragszahler zum UNDS Verantwortung und Chancen mit sich, insbesondere in einer Zeit, in der der größte Geldgeber seine Finanzierung zurücknimmt. Um ein wirksamer Befürworter von Multilateralismus zu sein, muss die Bundesregierung ihr eigenes Haus in Ordnung bringen.
• Sie sollte ihre Allokationsentscheidungen als ein Mittel zur Stärkung des Multilateralismus und zur Unterstützung von UN-Reformen betrachten und zu diesem Zweck auf eine ausgewogenere Finanzierungsmischung mit größeren Anteilen flexibler Mittel hinarbeiten.
• Sie sollte ihr verstärktes Engagement im UNDS gegenüber der deutschen Öffentlichkeit deutlicher kommunizieren und begründen und die Kohärenz ihrer multilateralen Bemühungen erhöhen.
• Sie sollte die versteckten Kosten abschätzen, die beim Einsatz von Durchführungsorganisationen entstehen, und interne Zweckbindungsrichtlinien im Einklang mit den im Rahmen des Grand Bargain (2016) und des UN Funding Compact (2019) eingegangenen Verpflichtungen verbessern.
• Sie sollte die kürzlich angehobenen Kernbeiträge für die UN-Entwicklungsorganisationen festschreiben, die strategische Bedeutung von Kernbeiträgen anerkennen und auch verstärkt auf weichere Formen zweckgebundener Finanzierungen zurückgreifen.

Im Petitionsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages fand heute eine Anhörung und Fragerunde zum Antrag auf Einführung eines Grundeinkommens statt. Jürgen Schupp, Senior Research Fellow des Sozio-oekonomischen Panels am Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin), kommentiert die Ergebnisse der Anhörung wie folgt:

Genau 60 Minuten dauerte die heutige Anhörung. Der Antrag, der Mitte März eingereicht und von 176.000 Personen unterstützt wurde, zielt darauf, die Vielzahl an Hilfsmaßnahmen zur Minderung der wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Folgen der Corona-Pandemie durch ein Krisengrundeinkommen zu ergänzen beziehungsweise abzulösen. Dieses soll jeder Bürgerin und jedem Bürger in Deutschland ohne Beantragung als Nettogrundeinkommen in Höhe von 550 Euro gewährt werden.

Die Anhörung im Petitionsausschuss hinterlässt den Eindruck, dass die Bundesregierung nicht gut beraten wäre, einen institutionellen Regimewechsel der sozialen Sicherung „am offenen Herzen“ vorzunehmen. Besser beraten wäre sie damit, den Zugang zu bestehenden Elementen zu vereinfachen. Zum einen sollte das zeitlich befristete, bedingungsärmere Beantragungs- und Auszahlungsverfahrens von Grundsicherungsleistungen verlängert werden. Zum anderen sollte geprüft werden, ob der Zugang vor allem für diejenigen Gruppen, die nicht durch sozialversicherungspflichtige Beschäftigung abgesichert sind, noch verbessert und vereinfacht werden kann.

Die befristete Aussetzung von Sanktionen, die vereinfachte Vermögensprüfung und auch die Erstattung der Wohnkosten sollten also vielmehr genutzt werden, diese Leistungen auch neuen Gruppen wie Solo-Selbständigen, Kulturschaffenden oder Honorarkräften zu öffnen – und zwar mit einer Kultur von mehr Vertrauen seitens der Behörden. Die Klärung der Debatte, ob ein solches bedingungsärmeres System der sozialen Sicherung auch längerfristig die überlegene Alternative zu garantistischen Grundeinkommensmodellen darstellt, sollte auf die Zeit nach der Corona-Krise vertagt werden, wenn auch Fragen eines möglichen Missbrauchs der bestehenden Regelungen empirisch beantwortet werden können. Auf der Tagesordnung sollte das Thema Grundeinkommen auf jeden Fall bleiben.

In a webinar organized by IPI MENA, diplomats, leaders of civil society, and religious representatives across different faiths and sects decried violence committed in the name of religion following the brutal events that transpired in Paris and reiterated their pledge to advocating a message of peace.

IPI MENA Director Nejib Friji opened the conference on October 25th by stressing zero tolerance of using violence or extremism, and most pertinently when targeted against youth and teachers, as agents of peace. He highlighted the importance of how a culture of peace and a united interreligious alliance is necessary to combat and counter violent extremism by fostering understanding, tolerance, and reciprocal respect.

The French Ambassador to the Kingdom of Bahrain, H.E Jérôme Cauchard highlighted France’s fight against violent extremism, for a comprehensive approach for a peaceful coexistence, and pointed to Bahrain as an example of interfaith diversity and unity.

Mr. Mounir Bouchenaki, Advisor to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), offered insights from initiatives carried out by the organization from a multilateral standpoint, wherein helping societies recognize peace and coexistence through enforcing a foundation built-in education and culture, enables societies to become more resilient against radicalization and violence.

Reverend Hani Aziz, Pastor of the National Evangelical Church of Bahrain reiterated his attachment to the respect of all cultures, religions, and civilizations. He called on faiths’ representatives to unite against violent extremism and radicalism.

Dr. Abdulla Ahmed Al Maqabi, Law Courts Directorate, Ministry of Justice & Islamic Affairs & Waqf, Mr. Ebrahim Nonoo, Representative of the Jewish Community in Bahrain, Mr. Sushil Muljimal, Chairman of the Krishna Temple in Bahrain, Ms. Tahera Jaberi, Representative of the Baha’i Faith in Bahrain, and Pastor Isaac Inayat, Urdu Language Congregation, National Evangelical Church of Bahrain all denounced the incorrect manipulation of religion to legitimize personal agendas, violence and conflicts, and stressed their commitment to tolerance, mutual respect and durable peace.

Die Abteilung Klimapolitik untersucht mit empirischen und theoretischen Ansätzen bisherige Wirkungen und zukünftige Gestaltungsoptionen von Politikinstrumenten und regulatorischen Rahmenbedingungen für die Transformation zur Klimaneutralität. Schwerpunkte bilden Arbeiten zum Strom- und Gebäudesektor, zur Industrie, zu Sustainable Finance sowie zu internationalen sektorbezogenen Kooperationen im Klimaschutz.

Gesucht wird eine oder ein

Postdoc (w/m/div)

im Rahmen zweier Projekte zur öffentlichen, internationalen und privaten Klimafinanzierung.

Dabei soll untersucht werden, wie die Mechanismen der internationalen Klimafinanzierung zu einer Stärkung von nationalen Energie- und Klimapolitiken beziehungsweise Mechanismen des Reportings und Risikomanagements des Finanzmarktes zu einer stärkeren Ausrichtung von Unternehmensstrategien auf Klimaneutralität beitragen können.

Event Video: 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-luayki").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-luayki").fadeIn(1000);});});

Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement, young people have emerged as a powerful force calling for transformative change on climate action. The United Nations’ “Youth 2030 Strategy” calls for expanded and systematic youth engagement in all arenas, and the commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the UN recognizes that “youth is the missing piece between development and peace.”

The practical steps and challenges of engaging youth in peace and climate action was the subject of an October 22nd virtual policy forum cosponsored by IPI, the Governments of Singapore and Sweden, the Office of the United Nations Secretary- General’s Envoy on Youth, the UN Office for Partnerships, the Office of the Assistant Secretary-General on Climate Action, the Global Challenges Foundation, the United Network of Young Peacebuilders, and the UN75 Campaign.

In opening remarks, Mary Robinson, Chair of the Elders, First Woman President of Ireland, and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, noted that COVID-19 had aggravated the devastating cost in human lives, and to economic growth, political momentum, and social inequality. “COVID-19 has exposed the interconnections between health, economic, and political risks of inaction and neglect.”

She declared, “Now is our opportunity to make change happen by design, and to realize this new design, we will have to listen to the voices of young people, and in the climate sphere, they are telling us to listen to the science, and listen we must.”

Jimena Leiva Roesch, IPI Senior Fellow and Head of the Peace and Sustainable Development Program, prompted the discussion with a general question to the young participants and diplomats. Did they think that the youth, peace, and security agendas were compatible?

Pedro Cunha, Regional Facilitator at Latin America and the Caribbean Engagement Mechanisms for the Society (LACEMOS) and member of United Network of Young Peacebuilders (UNOY) said the agendas were “more than compatible, they are complementary and co-dependent, as they are built on the same foundation of meaningful and inclusive participation of young people in decision-making and strong democratic governance.”

He said that from his conversations with peace and environmental activists in Latin America, he had concluded that there had to be a new category of international crime against peace, which he identified as “ecocide.”

“Right now there are four crimes against peace: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression,” he said. “All protect peoples and civilization, but we miss a key foundation of peace, to protect the earth and all its living beings. We are missing this fifth category of crimes against peace, and that is ecocide.”

Jayathma Wickramanayake, the UN Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth, said, “we all know from our work and our experience that youth, peace and climate are very much interlinked.” She mentioned two examples to make the point. “One is that seven of the ten peacekeeping missions that we have are actually based in countries that are most susceptible to climate change. And the second statistic is that these seven countries are some of the most youthful populations in the world.” She said that in countries like Somalia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Mali, up to 80 percent of the population was under the age of 30. “And we see these countries on the lists of those countries that are the most susceptible to violence and most vulnerable to climate change, and I don’t think this is a coincidence. I think this shows that young people are disproportionately affected by both conflict and by climate action.”

Nisreen Elsaim, Chair of both the Secretary-General’s Youth Advisory Group and the Sudan Youth Organization on Climate Change, offered up her own life experience as exemplifying the linkages. “I’m a climate change activist, I’m a young person, and I’m coming from a country that has suffered from civil wars for 40 years and a conflict over natural resources for 20 years.”

Geraldine Byrne Nason, Permanent Representative of Ireland to the UN, commented, “We know that we can’t transform the world in the way we need to, the way we set out to in the 2030 agenda unless we look at the interlinkages between the issues, the movements, and, I would argue, between the generations. So I know that the young people on the screen with us this morning are ready to help shape the world that they want. And we need to give them a voice in order to do that. But for all of that to happen, we have to recognize that the linkages between these agendas are as true for the Youth, Peace, and Security agenda as they are for the climate action movement.”

Ireland is joining the Security Council in January, and Ambassador Byrne Nason said that though climate change was contributing to all of the root causes of the conflicts that the Council deals with, there is “big resistance” on the Council to acting on it. And as for youth, she said, “It’s a very one-dimensional view of young people that we employ here at the UN. We want to see young people sitting at the Security Council during the debates, we want to see youth shape the way, and not just as custodians of the future and peace, we want to see youth shape the way we talk about issues that are currently on the table.” She promised, “You can rely on us to do that. I mean, let’s be clear, there are few issues that really affect young people more than the damaging impacts of climate change.”

Magnus Lennartsson, Deputy Permanent Representative of Sweden to the UN, said, “It is impossible to keep these agendas apart. They are, and should be, closely interlinked. The leadership of young women and men of different backgrounds is absolutely key in our search for a long term climate solution. Youth in decision-making is the way to ensure ambition and progress.”

Ambassador Lennartsson said that Sweden’s recent two-year service on the Security Council had convinced him that “it is simply not possible to have a serious discussion about what the world should or will look like tomorrow without including and listening to young women and men. It is, after all, the young people who will live longer in the world that we build together today. We know that in places where the impact of climate change is most severe, like the Sahel, like East Africa, the population is very young. And it is therefore not surprising that the strongest activism for climate action comes from the younger generation.”

Joan Cedano, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the UN, said that her country’s almost two years on the Security Council had shown her that the Council didn’t fully appreciate the linkages between the agendas. “The Council has recognized climate change as one major driver of conflict; however, it has not yet made the connection in terms of how this specifically and fundamentally affects young people living in conflict.” She implored young people to keep pressing for participation in the Council’s deliberations. “Young people will continue to make points to the Council and to us member states, the points that we are not making on our own. And please don’t stop doing it. You need to continue to be that voice that calls on policy-makers and the international community to do their jobs.”

In closing remarks, Ambassador Lennartsson asserted, “Youth are the agents of change, and they have a key stake in the jobs, the environment, and the economy of the future, and they have clearly demonstrated that, through activist movements, they have a sincere interest and willingness to support a rapid shift towards sustainable consumption and production.”

In closing the event, Ms. Leiva Roesch highlighted that the Tweet Chat preceding the event had received millions of impressions, underscoring the relevance of the topic. See our one-pager for outcomes from the Tweet Chat.

Ms. Leiva Roesch moderated the discussion.

.content .main .entry-header.w-thumbnail .cartouche {background: none; bottom: 0px;} h1.entry-title {font-size: 1.8em;}

Wie werden die 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) heute umgesetzt, fünf Jahre nach Verabschiedung der Agenda 2030? Dieser Beitrag fasst zusammen: In Deutschland ist zwar einiges erreicht worden, insbesondere beim Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien und bei der Verringerung von Schadstoffen in Luft, Gewässern und Böden. Aber das Gesamtbild macht deutlich, dass Fehlentwicklungen dominieren. Zunehmende Belastungen des Grundwassers und der Luft sowie ein enormer Verlust an Insektenpopulationen durch die Ausdehnung der intensiven Agrarwirtschaft und zu langsam sinkende Treibhausgasemissionen sind nur vier Beispiele. Unzureichende öffentliche Investitionen in die Daseinsvorsorge, in Bildung und Digitalisierung sind weitere. Das große Versprechen der Konferenz der Vereinten Nationen über Umwelt und Entwicklung, die Lebensbedingungen auf dem Planeten umweltverträglich zu gestalten und zu verbessern, wurde nicht eingehalten. Gelingt es der deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie nun, diesen Zustand für Deutschland und seine Rolle in der Welt zu verändern und die notwendigen strukturellen Transformationen tatsächlich zu erwirken? Dieser Beitrag sucht Antworten und skizziert ein realistisches Bild der zukünftigen deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie. Fest steht: der Druck auf Deutschland steigt mit einem Europäischen Green Deal und einer jungen Wählerschaft, die gegen den Klimawandel angeht.

Wie werden die 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) heute umgesetzt, fünf Jahre nach Verabschiedung der Agenda 2030? Dieser Beitrag fasst zusammen: In Deutschland ist zwar einiges erreicht worden, insbesondere beim Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien und bei der Verringerung von Schadstoffen in Luft, Gewässern und Böden. Aber das Gesamtbild macht deutlich, dass Fehlentwicklungen dominieren. Zunehmende Belastungen des Grundwassers und der Luft sowie ein enormer Verlust an Insektenpopulationen durch die Ausdehnung der intensiven Agrarwirtschaft und zu langsam sinkende Treibhausgasemissionen sind nur vier Beispiele. Unzureichende öffentliche Investitionen in die Daseinsvorsorge, in Bildung und Digitalisierung sind weitere. Das große Versprechen der Konferenz der Vereinten Nationen über Umwelt und Entwicklung, die Lebensbedingungen auf dem Planeten umweltverträglich zu gestalten und zu verbessern, wurde nicht eingehalten. Gelingt es der deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie nun, diesen Zustand für Deutschland und seine Rolle in der Welt zu verändern und die notwendigen strukturellen Transformationen tatsächlich zu erwirken? Dieser Beitrag sucht Antworten und skizziert ein realistisches Bild der zukünftigen deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie. Fest steht: der Druck auf Deutschland steigt mit einem Europäischen Green Deal und einer jungen Wählerschaft, die gegen den Klimawandel angeht.

Wie werden die 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SGDs) heute umgesetzt, fünf Jahre nach Verabschiedung der Agenda 2030? Dieser Beitrag fasst zusammen: In Deutschland ist zwar einiges erreicht worden, insbesondere beim Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien und bei der Verringerung von Schadstoffen in Luft, Gewässern und Böden. Aber das Gesamtbild macht deutlich, dass Fehlentwicklungen dominieren. Zunehmende Belastungen des Grundwassers und der Luft sowie ein enormer Verlust an Insektenpopulationen durch die Ausdehnung der intensiven Agrarwirtschaft und zu langsam sinkende Treibhausgasemissionen sind nur vier Beispiele. Unzureichende öffentliche Investitionen in die Daseinsvorsorge, in Bildung und Digitalisierung sind weitere. Das große Versprechen der Konferenz der Vereinten Nationen über Umwelt und Entwicklung, die Lebensbedingungen auf dem Planeten umweltverträglich zu gestalten und zu verbessern, wurde nicht eingehalten. Gelingt es der deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie nun, diesen Zustand für Deutschland und seine Rolle in der Welt zu verändern und die notwendigen strukturellen Transformationen tatsächlich zu erwirken? Dieser Beitrag sucht Antworten und skizziert ein realistisches Bild der zukünftigen deutschen Nachhaltigkeitsstrategie. Fest steht: der Druck auf Deutschland steigt mit einem Europäischen Green Deal und einer jungen Wählerschaft, die gegen den Klimawandel angeht.

In the debate on the environmental impacts on migration, migration as adaptation has been acknowledged as a potential risk management strategy, based on risk spreading and mutual insurance of people living spatially apart: migrants and family members that are left behind stay connected through a combination of financial and social remittances, joint decision-making and mutual commitment. Conceptualizing migration as adaptation as translocal livelihood systems enables us to identify the differentiated vulnerabilities of households and communities. COVID-19 and the restrictions on public life and mobility imposed by governments worldwide constitute a complex set of challenges for these translocal systems and strategies, especially in the Global South. Focusing on examples, we highlight two points: first, the COVID-19 crisis shows the limits of migration and translocal livelihoods for coping with and adapting to climate and environmental risks. Second, as these restrictions hit on a systemic level and affect places of destination as well as origin, the crisis reveals specific vulnerabilities of the translocal livelihoods themselves. Based on the translocal livelihoods approach, we formulate insights and recommendations for policies that move beyond the narrow, short-term focus on the support of migrant populations alone and address the longer-term root causes of the vulnerabilities in translocal livelihoods systems.

In the debate on the environmental impacts on migration, migration as adaptation has been acknowledged as a potential risk management strategy, based on risk spreading and mutual insurance of people living spatially apart: migrants and family members that are left behind stay connected through a combination of financial and social remittances, joint decision-making and mutual commitment. Conceptualizing migration as adaptation as translocal livelihood systems enables us to identify the differentiated vulnerabilities of households and communities. COVID-19 and the restrictions on public life and mobility imposed by governments worldwide constitute a complex set of challenges for these translocal systems and strategies, especially in the Global South. Focusing on examples, we highlight two points: first, the COVID-19 crisis shows the limits of migration and translocal livelihoods for coping with and adapting to climate and environmental risks. Second, as these restrictions hit on a systemic level and affect places of destination as well as origin, the crisis reveals specific vulnerabilities of the translocal livelihoods themselves. Based on the translocal livelihoods approach, we formulate insights and recommendations for policies that move beyond the narrow, short-term focus on the support of migrant populations alone and address the longer-term root causes of the vulnerabilities in translocal livelihoods systems.

In the debate on the environmental impacts on migration, migration as adaptation has been acknowledged as a potential risk management strategy, based on risk spreading and mutual insurance of people living spatially apart: migrants and family members that are left behind stay connected through a combination of financial and social remittances, joint decision-making and mutual commitment. Conceptualizing migration as adaptation as translocal livelihood systems enables us to identify the differentiated vulnerabilities of households and communities. COVID-19 and the restrictions on public life and mobility imposed by governments worldwide constitute a complex set of challenges for these translocal systems and strategies, especially in the Global South. Focusing on examples, we highlight two points: first, the COVID-19 crisis shows the limits of migration and translocal livelihoods for coping with and adapting to climate and environmental risks. Second, as these restrictions hit on a systemic level and affect places of destination as well as origin, the crisis reveals specific vulnerabilities of the translocal livelihoods themselves. Based on the translocal livelihoods approach, we formulate insights and recommendations for policies that move beyond the narrow, short-term focus on the support of migrant populations alone and address the longer-term root causes of the vulnerabilities in translocal livelihoods systems.

Besprechung des Buches von Wolfram Stierle, Über Leben in planetarischen Grenzen. Plädoyer für eine nachhaltige Entwicklungspolitik, Roßdorf: oekom verlag GmbH 2020

Besprechung des Buches von Wolfram Stierle, Über Leben in planetarischen Grenzen. Plädoyer für eine nachhaltige Entwicklungspolitik, Roßdorf: oekom verlag GmbH 2020

Besprechung des Buches von Wolfram Stierle, Über Leben in planetarischen Grenzen. Plädoyer für eine nachhaltige Entwicklungspolitik, Roßdorf: oekom verlag GmbH 2020

Event Video: 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery("#isloaderfor-ckjorb").fadeOut(2000, function () { jQuery(".pagwrap-ckjorb").fadeIn(1000);});});

Only 6 percent of all uniformed military, police, justice, and correctional personnel in United Nations field missions are women, and IPI Vice President Adam Lupel asked, “After 20 years and ten Security Council resolutions, why is it still so hard to increase the participation of uniformed women?”

Dr. Lupel was speaking to an October 20th IPI event co-sponsored with the Elsie Initiative for Women in Peace Operations and featuring a virtual discussion exploring answers to that question and launching the IPI policy paper “Woman First, Soldier Second: Taboos and Stigmas Facing Military Women in UN Peace Operations.” The paper is a product of IPI’s Women in Peace Operations Project, which is supported by the Government of Canada.

Jody Thomas, Deputy Minister of the Department of National Defence, Canada, introduced the discussion with an account of her own personal experience as a beginning officer. “I went aboard my first ship completely confident in my ability to be an excellent and equal shipmate. Not everyone agreed. There were some who were adamant that my gender was a weakness that they were being forced to accommodate, and they were angry about it. Their words and actions reinforced that I was not welcome, that there was something wrong with me actually wanting to be on a ship.

“That behavior was and is a reflection of a deeply rooted stigma that it is somehow wrong and inappropriate for women to serve in uniform. This kind of resistance to women in service—words, actions, attitudes—persists, and all that is rooted in the same stigma and taboos: women should not serve in combat roles; they should be out of the way; serving in ways that are not dangerous. Our country and our armed forces have made a lot of progress since those days, and it was a long time ago, in terms of our policy and our approach, but we have more to do to fight stigmas here in Canada and in countries around the world.”

Deputy Minister Thomas reported that Canada and Norway had pioneered a new barrier assessment methodology for police and military organizations and that the Canadian Armed Forces would be undergoing this assessment in the coming months.

Lotte Vermeij, Senior Adviser to the Norwegian Armed Forces and author of the report, said she had interviewed 142 women from 53 countries across 11 UN missions ranging in rank from private to major general. She said she addressed three levels: (1) the individual and community levels (2) within national defense structures and (3) during deployments to UN Peace Operations.

As an example of the mindset they face, Dr. Vermeij said, “Women are often seen as less feminine and less marriageable by their communities.” She quoted a military woman deployed to the UN mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, who had told her, “The community sees us as masculine, angry, and more aggressive than normal civilian women as we are trying to fit in with a male-dominated culture. At the same time, single women may be seen as promiscuous, while mothers are often perceived as neglecting their families.”

Another military woman told her, “I witnessed multiple cases of inappropriate behavior that made me feel more unsafe within the walls of the mission than outside.”

Dr. Vermeij said that women’s lack of authority and their minority status within the force made it very difficult for them to report and address these issues. “Women who did speak up were often discouraged from making official complaints and were sometimes even bullied and isolated.”

In pushing back, Dr. Vermeij said, “Women use a range of strategies, including sharing information with their families and friends, working harder to prove themselves and sometimes isolating themselves during deployments to avoid certain situations. They also turn to formal and informal support structures.”

“Unfortunately,” she added, “the burden of change often falls on individual women themselves rather than on institutions. Not surprisingly, these dynamics perpetuate the underrepresentation of women, military peacekeepers in UN missions.”

Among the recommendations she said the interviewed military women made were “the UN Department of Peace Operations should strengthen narratives on the importance of female peacekeepers in mission, ensure that all peacekeepers respect UN values, develop mission-specific general strategies and plans, engage more firmly with troop-contributing countries, make recruitment and selection processes more gender-sensitive, hold personnel accountable for discriminatory and sexualized behavior, and establish in-mission support systems.”

Major Kristy Hudson, Military Training Officer, UN Department of Peace Operations, said that women had to be alert to signs of discrimination, even seemingly small ones, and to signal their robust refusal to tolerate it. “This isn’t just about overt harassment, this is about the tiny moments that leaders let go past every day, and there’s a great saying that I love, ‘The standard that you walk by is the standard that you accept.’ If you are silent when a woman is dismissed as a leader, you are telling the team a woman can be ignored. So let this ‘bystander effect’ drive leadership in missions from the junior leader to the most senior leaders, and we will tackle a lot of these stigmas.”

Major Hudson said that women were wrongfully suspected of resisting deployment. “If someone says they don’t want to deploy, it won’t be because they don’t want to deploy, it would be because there is a barrier. Find out what that barrier is and what your organization is doing about it. In most cases, it’s actually about parenting issues that men and women both need support with. So address that. Consider unconscious bias because a lot of the decisions we make are not intentional, we just haven’t thought about it from the other side whether it’s an intersectional issue or a gender issue.”

Dr. Vermeij said her research bore out the view that women wanted to deploy, and not just in reduced roles. “We sometimes hear this argument that women don’t want to deploy. From the interviews, I can tell you that they do want to be deployed in those roles and they certainly want to be deployed, for example, at military observer sites.”

Major General Kristin Lund, formerly Head of Mission, UN Truce Supervision Organization, and Force Commander, UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus, also dismissed the notion that women were not willing to deploy. “When it comes to ‘females don’t want to be deployed,’ I think that’s a myth. When Norwegians deployed to Afghanistan, they came back and said, ‘We need them, we cannot solve the problems out there without the women.’ It has to be shown that these women are able and capable of doing what men are doing.” She pointed out that career advancement often depended on it. “In your career, you need to be deployed if you went to have a future.”

Major Hudson brought up an area where women’s needs were exasperatingly not taken into account. “Only yesterday, I had a so-called military expert argue with me that it was a waste of time to make sure that military equipment was adapted to meet the requirements of women. His view, and I’ve heard it many times before, was that it was unreasonable that a female soldier should expect to have vital protective equipment, in this case, a helmet that actually fit her sufficiently to protect her skull while not slipping down and obscuring her vision and preventing her from performing her duties as a soldier. And that blows my mind.”

Wing Commander Llani Kennealy, Military Liaison Officer – Peacekeeping, UN Women, had a terse rejoinder to this kind of thinking. “Male clothing and equipment are not well suited to women’s bodies, and calling equipment unisex doesn’t cut it.”

Major General Lund outlined the challenges that military women faced in becoming leaders. “For me, now a retired major general in the Norwegian Army, it took me 15 years to find my leader philosophy. Why? Well, your only role models were men, and you saw what kind of values they appreciated to get you promoted. But by hard work, I got stronger and wiser and managed to lead the way I wanted to be led.”

She illustrated how the particular challenges for a woman leader remain even once you’ve assumed responsibility. ‘When I was Force Commander in Cyprus, I had to check, for example, which were the troop- contributing countries where prostitution was illegal. For me, that was an indicator of men’s attitudes towards women. And I had to pay more attention to give guidelines to those contingents and their commanders. I changed that, providing doors to lavatories, curtains in front of the urinals, and separation walls in containers, small simple changes that you can make. The sub-commanders understood my intention and removed inappropriate posters in the gyms.”

Major Hudson called for more attention from the UN and troop-contributing countries to the recruitment and training of military women. ”If a country is to be serious about deploying women and treating them with respect, they must deliberately seek to grow this cadre using the same care and attention they use to grow the male workforce. That is in training, career development, in coaching and mentoring, and that means building from the ground. And if we want female sector commanders and force commanders, we need to start recruitment. Countries must show that women are taken seriously as military personnel, and that they’re not being deployed merely as quotas to be met.”

Wing Commander Kennealy said that military women had developed among themselves successful informal means of being effective and independent in a male-dominated world. “Women, experiencing the stigmas and taboos highlighted in this research identified that in the first instance, rather than raise issues with their chain of command, they often seek assistance from talking to other women through informal networks. This highlights that leadership and networks in no way operate independently of each other. These networks will often develop out of necessity driven by women as a result of a lack of leadership or the inadequacy of systems and policies that support a diverse work force.”

Ms. Kennealy theorized a general reason why there was a need for these networks. “Military organizations are by their very nature striving for uniformity, and they have generally been designed on a male career model that doesn’t allow for the flexibility of career breaks or other policy interventions that help to support and maintain women in their careers alongside their male cohorts.” At the same time, she cautioned against overdependence on these informal networks. “It is critical that through these associations, we do not perpetuate the idea that the need for the structural change to improve the conditions and experiences of our women is just women’s business as this simply is not correct. It is the responsibility of commanders and capability managers to seek policy changes to achieve enabling capability and mission success.”

Lieutenant Colonel Nomthandazo Ditire is a former military intelligence officer for the South African National Defense Force who now serves as a military planning officer at the Military Planning Service of the Office of Military Affairs (OMA) at the UN Department of Peace Operations. She is concerned at the relatively few numbers of women in the higher ranks.

“We still see more women as non-ranking cadre members, we see them as platoon commanders, however, we haven’t seen much more in the sense of company commanders, battalion commanders, sector commanders and also making sure that the force commanders, sector commanders are also recruited. OMA also needs to integrate women so that we know that this will cascade down to the field.

“And mission-specific gender strategies should be more than simply having a woman on a planning team or in a decision-making role, but should look to the benefits of women at all levels in the mission across the different functions and within the military contingents themselves. Women should not just be doing medical or logical or logistical or administrative work, but also can be effectively training combat readiness and also in engagements. Women should be playing a vital role in intelligence gathering and also patrols and physical operations.”

Wing Commander Llani Kennealy underlined the importance of continuing to push for change. “Change will require strong, committed leadership at all levels of decision-making, but just as critical, change will require ongoing advocacy, activism and encouragement by military women and for military women.”

After hearing from the other military women on the panel, she remarked that it could have been depressing listening to the personal accounts of the damaging effect that taboos and stigmas had on women, but that instead she had come away inspired by what she had heard.

“Potentially this commonality of experience could be perceived as deflating – that the issues of stigmas and taboos are too widespread and too ingrained in military culture to change. However, I look at this unity of experience and understanding reported by these women as something very different, and in fact, I see this commonality of awareness as a real opportunity.

“Through this unity of experience comes a unity of purpose. Our commonality of experiences will lead directly to a unity for change.”

Gretchen Baldwin, IPI Senior Policy Analyst for Women, Peace, and Security, moderated the discussion.

.content .main .entry-header.w-thumbnail .cartouche {background: none; bottom: 0px;} h1.entry-title {font-size: 1.8em;}

The right to receive official development assistance (ODA) has been linked to a definition that relates “developing” with certain levels of gross domestic product per capita, irrespective of transformative needs, such as exemplified in the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. Increasing GDP levels lead to a growing number of developing countries “graduating” to the status of non-ODA receivers. International development cooperation has been focused on a rather narrow understanding of development which is now surpassed by the need to engage in universal transformation processes which requires a strengthening and reinvention of international cooperation. In this chapter, Imme Scholz (DIE) and Elizabeth Sidiropoulos (SAIIA) discuss the following questions with Andreas Proksch and Juliane Kolsdorf (GIZ): What are the overarching issues determining world politics and who are the old and the new actors driving them? What is the impact of these global shifts on international cooperation, especially development cooperation? Of what relevance are roles, status and categories and what is the impact of changes in positions and relations? What challenges face multilateralism and what ways exist to maintain and renew strategic partnerships and shared values?

The right to receive official development assistance (ODA) has been linked to a definition that relates “developing” with certain levels of gross domestic product per capita, irrespective of transformative needs, such as exemplified in the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. Increasing GDP levels lead to a growing number of developing countries “graduating” to the status of non-ODA receivers. International development cooperation has been focused on a rather narrow understanding of development which is now surpassed by the need to engage in universal transformation processes which requires a strengthening and reinvention of international cooperation. In this chapter, Imme Scholz (DIE) and Elizabeth Sidiropoulos (SAIIA) discuss the following questions with Andreas Proksch and Juliane Kolsdorf (GIZ): What are the overarching issues determining world politics and who are the old and the new actors driving them? What is the impact of these global shifts on international cooperation, especially development cooperation? Of what relevance are roles, status and categories and what is the impact of changes in positions and relations? What challenges face multilateralism and what ways exist to maintain and renew strategic partnerships and shared values?