Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik / Analysen

Autokratien sind weltweit auf dem Vormarsch. Um diesen Trend zu stoppen, müssen westliche Demokratien sowohl vor der eigenen Haustüre kehren als auch Demokratien in Entwicklungsländern fördern.

The world is witnessing a trend towards autocratic rule. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has made it even more important to stop this trend. Western democracies must do their best – at home and in support of democracies in developing countries.

The world is witnessing a trend towards autocratic rule. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has made it even more important to stop this trend. Western democracies must do their best – at home and in support of democracies in developing countries.

Since the previous version of this publication (September 2020), WTO negotiations on Investment Facilitation for Development have made steady progress. The number of participating members has increased to over 110, and the consolidated draft negotiation text has been updated to reflect progress made regarding a number of provisions. A number of investment facilitation measures that were highlighted in the first edition of this publication seem to have been included in the current WTO Investment Facilitation for Development (IFD) Agreement draft text, or are under consideration by Members. Among the measures that indirectly contribute to development by increasing FDI inflows, the following seem to be included: maintain a list of support measures offered to inward investors, through online portals and notification to the WTO; enable the payment of fees and charges online; use new technology to facilitate investment, e.g., digital single window; grant permits or licences automatically if no government action is taken within statutory time limits: ‘silence is consent’; provide for risk-based approvals as part of authorisation procedures; track complaints through an investment grievance mechanism or ‘early warning system’ to identify and address issues early before they worsen; make it easy to secure work permits for skilled expatriates by making available e-visas or ‘green channels’; make publicly available lists of support measures for outward investors through online portals; and publish information on requirements and procedures for outward investment, if any, to assist interested parties. Furthermore, the ITC-DIE project called to facilitate not only more FDI, but also more sustainable FDI through the inclusion of facilitation measures aimed at directly increasing the development impact of FDI, to fully reflect the ‘for development’ purpose of the IFD Agreement. The first edition of this publication proposed the following direct investment facilitation measures that seem to have been included in the IFD Agreement draft text or are under consideration by negotiators: encourage foreign investors to incorporate internationally recognised principles, standards and guidelines of responsible business conduct; build and maintain a database of local enterprises to help investors identify potential subcontractors and local partners; and establish supplier-development programmes to increase the number and capacity of qualified local enterprises that can contract or partner with foreign affiliates. The project also emphasised the importance of providing technical assistance to developing countries and least developed country (LDC) Members to enhance their ability to facilitate FDI and, specifically, sustainable FDI. The current IFD Agreement draft text includes a section on the provision of technical assistance and capacity building for developing countries and LDC Members. In addition, the first edition of this publication included the recommendation to insulate the IFD Agreement from international investment agreements, and especially their dispute-settlement provisions, through appropriate treaty-interface clauses, to avoid the use of the IFD Agreement in investor-state dispute-settlement cases; the current IFD text contains an appropriate clause in this regard. This updated version synthesises what has been learned from numerous capacity-building workshops and consultations with stakeholders (governments, international organisations, investment promotion agencies (IPAs), the private sector, civil society, academia) conducted in the framework of the ITC-DIE project on Investment Facilitation for Development (parts of the project are co-organised with other organisations).

Globalisation has been linked to social disintegration and political backlash against trade. How does this happen? And if we can absorb globalisation shocks to society, what are relevant policies to do so? I propose a framework that links globalisation to social cohesion outcomes, identifying three channels through which cohesion is affected: workers, households, and firms.

Increasingly, the world’s 2-3 billion poor and vulnerable people face multiple overlaying crises – climate-related disasters, conflict, the Covid-19 pandemic and others. The complex challenges resulting from the ambition to become carbon-neutral by 2050 and tackle these crises in tandem will adversely affect vulnerable people and communities as well as groups suffering from intersecting inequalities that can be exacerbated. To achieve its ambitious goals, not least in climate and health, the G7 should lead a global campaign in favour of  integrated social protection programmes and the concept of ‘growth from below’ as cornerstones of development strategies.  This will enable a green recovery and fair transition towards sustainability in G7 countries and beyond, while helping and protecting vulnerable people and households against at least some of the many risks they face. This approach would not only contribute to reducing poverty rates and preventing impoverishment but also address multidimensional inequalities, working towards the 2030 Agenda’s mandate of leaving no one behind.

In the context of an increasing divergence of models, a highly divergent recovery and overlapping and multiple global crises, multi-level governance is critical to address systemic challenges. The benefits of such a strategy, too long ignored by national governments, was well documented during the Covid-19 pandemic. Thus, the G7 presidency of Germany has launched a G7 Urban development track to support investments for a better future and a sustainable planet and it has acknowledged the formation of an urban engagement group in the G7. The creation of an infrastructure club, complementing the G7 Germany proposal of a climate club would be an innovative way to support the transformative power of cities in the G7 and nurture a quality dialogue between G7 and G20 in support of the delivery of the Agenda 2030 despite times of uncertainties.

The European Green Deal (EGD) has been described as a transformation strategy for the European continent, but its success also depends on cooperation at global level. Therefore, the EU intends to engage other actors and show international leadership on the climate agenda and the energy transition. This paper analyses the external dimension of the EGD, with a focus on global partnerships and EU leadership. Specifically, it examines EU relations with (re)emerging economies, in particular China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, and South Africa. Based on information acquired through cooperation with local research institutions, the paper examines prospects for partnership between the EU and these countries in the implementation of the EGD goals. We argue that great potential exists for green cooperation between the EU and re(emerging) economies. However, diplomatic conflict may occur if the EU attempts to shift the costs of the energy transition on partner countries.

Bonn, 30.05.2022. Vor fünfzig Jahren schreckte ein 200 Seiten starkes Werk die Weltöffentlichkeit auf: „Limits to Growth – Grenzen des Wachstums“ rückte ins Bewusstsein, dass stetige Wachstumsprozesse auf einem endlichen Planeten an Grenzen stoßen können oder sogar müssen. Den Bericht hatte der Club of Rome in Auftrag gegeben. Dieser wurde 1968 ins Leben gerufen und ist ein informeller Zusammenschluss von hochrangigen Personen aus Politik, Diplomatie, Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft. Die Mission des Club of Rome ist es, drängende Menschheitsfragen nicht länger in disziplinären Silos, sondern als komplexe interdependente Themen zu betrachten. Diese sollen in umfassenden und langfristig angelegten Forschungen bearbeitet und daraus Handlungsempfehlungen abgeleitet werden. Die Geschichte von „Limits to Growth“ hat gezeigt, dass so gestaltete Forschungen tatsächlich weltweite politische Debatten anstoßen und dauerhaft verankern können.

Der Bericht wirft einen Blick in die Zukunft, basierend auf fünf Megatrends der ausgehenden sechziger und beginnenden siebziger Jahre: Bevölkerungswachstum, Industrialisierung, Unterernährung, Verbrauch nicht-erneuerbarer Rohstoffe und Umweltverschmutzung. Erstmals in der Geschichte der Erdsystemforschung wurden Computer eingesetzt, um die Entwicklung komplexer Systeme im Zeitverlauf zu modellieren. Unter verschiedenen Annahmen wird untersucht, wie sich die genannten Megatrends jeweils für sich und im Zusammenspiel untereinander entwickeln werden. Eine zentrale Botschaft ist, dass einige der Beobachtungsgrößen, konkret die Bevölkerung und die industrielle Produktion nicht linear, sondern exponentiell wachsen. Wenn andere Systemelemente, beispielsweise die Nahrungsmittelproduktion, nur linear gesteigert werden können, müssen massive Probleme zwingend auftreten. Die Autor*innen äußern die Befürchtung, dass Fortschritte z.B. bei der Reduktion der Umweltverschmutzung je Produktionseinheit durch einen exponentiellen Anstieg der Produktion überkompensiert werden. Ohne den Übergang von einem Wachstums- zu einem Gleichgewichtsmodell, so die Schlussfolgerung, ist ein schneller Systemzusammenbruch in naher Zukunft zwingend.

Der Bericht wurde über die Jahrzehnte hinweg intensiv und vielfältig rezipiert. Die Berechnungen und die ihnen zugrundeliegenden Annahmen werden rückwirkend teilweise als übermäßig vereinfachend und zu pessimistisch beurteilt. So konnte die Belastung städtischer Luft mit Schwefeldioxid nach 1972 deutlich schneller verringert werden als im Bericht als bestmögliches Szenario beschrieben. Die Lebensmittelerzeugung wurde dynamischer ausgeweitet als angenommen. Die Industrialisierung als dominante oder gar einzige Form des Wirtschaftswachstums zu interpretieren, ist in der Nachbetrachtung unzureichend: Seit 1970 hat der Anteil des verarbeitenden Gewerbes an der Wertschöpfung deutlich zugunsten von Dienstleistungen abgenommen. 

Andere Studien zeigen aber, dass einzelne der Megatrends und ihr Zusammenspiel sich im Zeitverlauf durchaus bestätigt haben. Andere Bedrohungen kamen hinzu, die 1972 noch kaum beachtet wurden. Der Klimawandel beispielsweise findet in „Grenzen des Wachstums“ lediglich kursorische Erwähnung im Mittelteil des Berichts; ähnlich verhält es sich mit dem Verlust an Biodiversität und dem Artensterben.

Für die Nachhaltigkeitsdebatte gerade in Deutschland ist folgende Betrachtung „50 Jahre danach“ von großer Bedeutung. Technologischer Fortschritt kann, stärker als 1972 prognostiziert, Wachstumsprozesse auf der einen von Umweltzerstörung und der Erschöpfung natürlicher Ressourcen und Senken auf der anderen Seite abkoppeln. Oft bedeutet dies keine absolute Entkoppelung, d.h. Ressourcen werden weiter verknappt und Senken belastet, nur geschieht dies deutlich langsamer als 1972 vermutet. Dies verschafft der Menschheit Zeit, um neue Modelle für die nachhaltige Entwicklung zu entwickeln und umzusetzen.

Leider wird in Deutschland der Technologiediskurs oft mehr von der Furcht vor Risiken als von Optimismus bezüglich neuer Chancen geprägt. Dies betrifft weite Teile von Politik und Zivilgesellschaft. Aber auch die wissenschaftliche Technikfolgenabschätzung steht in der Tradition, vor allem mögliche nicht-intendierte negative Folgen von neuen Technologien in den Blick zu nehmen. Diese von dem Philosophen Hans Jonas als „Heuristik der Furcht“ gekennzeichnete Haltung kann Innovationen ausbremsen, was sich am Beispiel von Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) ebenso zeigen lässt wie bei neuen Pflanzenzuchtmethoden wie CRISPR-CAS. Wir plädieren nicht für Blindheit gegenüber möglichen Risiken neuer Technologien. Angesichts rasch erodierender planetarer Grenzen sollte eine angemessene Bewertung von Innovationen aber in eine ergebnisoffene Einschätzung von Chancen und Risiken eingebettet werden. Nur so können Politik und Gesellschaft wichtige Leitplanken für die technologische Entwicklung setzen, ohne sie unnötig und ethisch nicht vertretbar zu verlangsamen.

Andreas Stamm ist wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Deutschen Institut für Entwicklungspolitik.

Jakob Rhyner ist Wissenschaftlicher Direktor der Bonner Allianz für Nachhaltigkeitsforschung / Innovations-Campus Bonn (ICB).

Hartmut Ihne ist Präsident der Hochschule Bonn-Rhein-Sieg.

With their varied interests and needs, are European and African countries likely to build a stronger partnership? The Summit of the European Union and the African Union (EU-AU) at the end of February shows that cooperation between the two continents carries on. Yet, the need for a makeover of the partnership has been increasingly voiced. To ensure that the sustainability transition becomes an opportunity for enhanced cooperation rather than a barrier, the EU and African countries must discuss all implications of envisioned measures and plan for a sustainable future together. To that end, they need to ensure an eye-level partnership, with joint learning and knowledge creation, joint circular economy systems, and enhanced jobs and economic benefits on both sides. They must break out of old partnership patters to address each other’s challenges and support each other’s potential, while acknowledging intrinsic heterogeneity and varied needs as well as the implications of their long history together.

Global Supply Chains (GSCs) have become a key feature of globalisation. Production processes are increasingly broken down into specific tasks and organised across national borders. They are organised and  governed by “lead firms” (Gereffi, 1994) that set many of the standards according to which other firms in the chain operate. About half of all global trade is nowadays organised in GSCs (World Bank, 2020a). The organisational structure of GSCs has an enormous influence on whether the global community reaches the Sustainable Development Goals. GSCs have enabled developing countries to access international markets  and thereby increase people’s incomes, but the types of new employment created do not always meet international standards of decent work. Likewise, global firms often introduce new technologies and better environmental practices to local firms, but their integration in GSCs also triggers additional resource extraction and boosts transport-related greenhouse gas emissions. Put simply: While GSCs provide new  opportunities to firms and countries, GSC integration does not automatically translate into sustainable development in its economic, social and environmental dimensions.

WhatsApp is the most popular messaging platform in over 80% of countries in West Africa, and a daily port of call for a wide range of information and services. This chapter is part of an edited collection that seeks to examine the impact that this technology and the fundamental changes that WhatsApp has brought to many citizens' lives in social, economic and political contexts.
 

This study explores to what extent the COVID-19 crisis has been a turning point in the industrialisation process and the overall progress of countries towards sustainable development and what this implies for future inclusive and sustainable industrial development policies. The focus of the study is on latecomer economies.

This paper examines whether social protection – in the form of existing social assistance programmes – affects measures of household well-being such as poverty, food security and costly risk-coping behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using primary data from nationally representative, in-person surveys in Kenya allows the exploration of the impacts of major social assistance programmes. Our analysis employs the doubly robust difference-in-differences approach to estimate the impacts of social assistance programmes on common measures of household welfare. We find that social assistance programmes significantly reduce the prevalence of economic shocks and the further impoverishment of beneficiaries during the pandemic. Furthermore, households with social assistance coverage are less likely to sell assets as a coping strategy. Overall, the results suggest that, during a systematic crisis such as a pandemic, pre-existing social assistance schemes can deliver positive impacts in line with the primary goals of social safety nets and prevent households from falling deeper into poverty by preserving their asset base.

The present situation of protracted crises – climate, biodiversity, the pandemic and the war in Ukraine – and their repercussions on human wellbeing appear overwhelming. With the Green Deal, Team Europe and Global Gateway the EU has presented several ambitious initiatives to address these crises but has neglected the dialogue with its partners. Europe was under considerable (geo)political pressure to provide these responses, yet the internal discussions leading to their adoption and the time pressure meant that the dialogue with its international partners was limited in both scope and depth. This not only contradicts its aim to move away from so-called ‘donor-recipient relations’ but also jeopardises the effectiveness and sustainability of its initiatives. In the long run, Europe can only address these crises by building and sustaining strong and responsive global alliances.

Germany promotes “just transition” as a guiding principle for the global transition to a socially and environmentally sustainable economy that incorporates the necessary climate, environmental and energy policy measures. This includes the urgent transformation of economies to become emission neutral while ensuring a process whereby poverty and inequality are reduced, and no one is left behind.
The German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), the World Bank and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) worked together to explore ways to implement the concept of just transition in German development cooperation. The two papers that have resulted from this process outline approaches to a “just transition for all” and highlight its potential to reduce poverty and inequality (SDG 1 and SDG 10).
In recent decades, the interdependencies between social and ecological development have become clear: negative effects of climate change particularly affect vulnerable and marginalised groups living in poverty. At the same time, social inequalities contribute to an exacerbation of climate change. A just transition must effectively address the consequences at the international, national, regional and local levels.
Both papers provide an overview of existing approaches and challenges to foster a “just transition for all”. They offer different but complementary perspectives on an increasingly important complex of topics.
This first paper, by DIE, takes a broad perspective by considering the decarbonisation of the energy sector as a whole, outlining the connections between just transition, poverty and inequality, and exploring how to ensure a just transition (for both workers and consumers) through the use of different social protection mechanisms. It argues that it is possible to make energy transitions just, but that properly designed combinations of socio-economic and climate policies are needed.
A second paper, by the World Bank, zooms in on the transition away from coal. It lays out key social and community impacts resulting from the decommissioning of coal assets, based on experience gained from World Bank operations and from industrialised countries, and articulates an enhanced approach to supporting the coal transition. Both provide practical recommendations for international development cooperation in general, and for German development cooperation in particular.

Bei einem Treffen in Berlin haben die Entwicklungsminister der G-7 Staaten eine neue Allianz für globale Ernährungssicherheit ins Leben gerufen. Über die Bedeutung dieses Bündnisses. Im Interview der Katholischen Nachrichten-Agentur (KNA) erklärt die Direktorin des Deutschen Instituts für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), Anna-Katharina Hornidge, welche Möglichkeiten aus diesem neuen Bündnis entstehen, wie sich die Entwicklungspolitik langfristig aufstellen muss – und warum wir dringend unser Bild von Afrika verändern müssen.

This paper uses the Quantile Vector-Autoregressive (Q-VAR) connectedness technique to examine the return and volatility connectedness among NFTs and (un)conventional assets including cryptocurrency, energy, technology, equity, precious metals, and fixed income financial assets across three quantiles corresponding to the normal, bearish, and bullish market conditions. It also explores the predictive powers of major macroeconomic and geopolitical indicators on the return and volatility connectedness across these three market conditions using a linear regression model. The main findings are as follows. First, the return and volatility connectedness vary across the market conditions, with the levels during the bearish and bullish market conditions being higher. Second, except under the bullish market condition, the total return connectedness is higher than those of total volatility connectedness. Third, NFTs are, at best, decoupled from (un)conventional assets during the normal market condition. Fourth, NFTs is a net return shock receivers except under the bullish market condition where it is a net transmitters. However, it is a net volatility shock receiver irrespective of the market condition. Fifth, during periods of economic crisis the total return and volatility connectedness rise (decreases) under the normal and bearish (bullish) market conditions. Finally, geopolitical risks, business environment conditions, and market and economic policy uncertainty are important predictors of return and volatility connectedness, although the predictive strength and direction vary across market conditions. We discuss the implications of our findings.

This paper analyzes the dependence between a newspaper-based economic sentiment index of the United States and four climate-themed financial indices since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. We use the quantile cross-spectral technique of Barunik and Kley (The Econometrics Journal 22:131–152, 2019), which allows dependence to vary across different time horizons and market conditions. Results show that when market conditions were very poor, dependence is strongest between economic sentiment and green bonds index in the intermediate time. However, under normal market returns, results show a similar pattern of increased dependence across the weekly, monthly and yearly cycles for all the climate-themed indices except green bonds. Besides, at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, normal returns dependence with economic sentiment was mostly positive and stronger than the lower and higher quantiles. Lastly, the strongest dependence under the 0.05|0.95 quantiles during the peak of COVID-19 pandemic occurred with green bonds in the short-term.

The ongoing fairway adaptation of the Elbe Estuary is one of the most contested infrastructure projects in Germany in recent years. After a 17-year, highly contested planning process, delayed by a number of court proceedings, the dredging works started in 2019. The dredging aimed to establish a depth of at least 17.40 m below mean sea level, permitting the port to handle larger container vessels independent of the tide. Environmental NGOs, fishers and the riverine municipalities claim that the dredging will lead to habitat destruction, terminate the fishery in the estuary, and that it violates the European Water Framework Directive. The conflict illustrates that knowledge production, political economy and power are closely intertwined and provides evidence that some planning conflicts go even deeper than this. They are ultimately rooted in different ‘estuary ontologies’, in the different ways in which nature is enacted, and in different imaginations of possible futures for the Elbe estuary and its riverine population. Based on qualitative interviews with the actors who are involved in, observe or fight against the intervention, and on a content analysis of press articles and webpages, we unravel the complex relations between political economy, knowledge production and the different performances of reality which characterize the ongoing conflict over the fairway adaptation. We relate competing narratives, knowledge claims and ontologies to the actors promoting and challenging the fairway adaptation. Finally, we identify multiple estuary realities, which are enacted by specific practices performed by fishers, port authorities and environmental NGOs.