Hinweis: Gegenüber der ursprünglichen Version des Statements musste folgender Satz korrigiert werden (frühere Version in Klammern): "Zwar sind im aktuellen Haushaltsentwurf 37 (statt zuvor: 36) Milliarden Euro für dieses Jahr und über 55 Milliarden Euro für 2026 (statt zuvor: 2025) vorgesehen, doch die Erfahrung zeigt, dass das sehr ambitioniert ist." Wir bitten, den Fehler zu entschuldigen.
Das Statistische Bundesamt hat heute bekannt gegeben, dass das Bruttoinlandsprodukt in Deutschland im zweiten Quartal 2025 um 0,1 Prozent gegenüber dem ersten Quartal gesunken ist. Dazu eine Einschätzung von Geraldine Dany-Knedlik, Konjunkturchefin des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin):
Die deutsche Wirtschaft hat nach starkem Jahresauftakt leicht an Tempo verloren, der Aufschwung ist damit aber nicht abgeblasen. Jetzt ist Geduld gefragt. Produktion und Geschäftsklima im Verarbeitenden Gewerbe entwickeln sich positiv. Auch die Einigung im Zollstreit zwischen der EU und den USA sorgt für mehr Planungssicherheit, wenngleich – nach allem, was man bisher weiß – keine Entlastung bei den Zöllen zu erwarten ist. Im Gegenteil, die Belastungen werden wohl leicht steigen. Einen entscheidenden Beitrag zu einem stärkeren Aufschwung werden die geplanten Investitionen aus dem Sondervermögen für Infrastruktur und Klimaschutz leisten. Zwar sind im aktuellen Haushaltsentwurf 37 Milliarden Euro für dieses Jahr und über 55 Milliarden Euro für 2026 vorgesehen, doch die Erfahrung zeigt, dass das sehr ambitioniert ist. Es wäre schon eine Erfolgsgeschichte, wenn die Hälfte der geplanten Mittel abfließen würde. Die Umsetzung der Projekte braucht Zeit. Planung, Vergabe und Umsetzungsphase verzögern die Wirkung, sodass spürbare Impulse erst ab 2026 zu erwarten sind.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House has reignited deep uncertainty about the trajectory of global development cooperation. Long before 2025, the multilateral system was already under pressure. But Trump’s second term marks a normative rupture: the retreat of the United States not just from global leadership, but from the very principles of internationalism, multilateralism, and development solidarity it once helped to construct. In response to this new reality, EADI and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) convened a diverse group of researchers to reflect on the implications of the “Trump 2.0 moment”. The result is a newly released EADI–IDOS Discussion Paper, Development and Development Policy in the Trump Era, which brings together sixteen concise contributions from scholars based across Europe, Asia, and Latin America, offering perspectives from both the Global North and South.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House has reignited deep uncertainty about the trajectory of global development cooperation. Long before 2025, the multilateral system was already under pressure. But Trump’s second term marks a normative rupture: the retreat of the United States not just from global leadership, but from the very principles of internationalism, multilateralism, and development solidarity it once helped to construct. In response to this new reality, EADI and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) convened a diverse group of researchers to reflect on the implications of the “Trump 2.0 moment”. The result is a newly released EADI–IDOS Discussion Paper, Development and Development Policy in the Trump Era, which brings together sixteen concise contributions from scholars based across Europe, Asia, and Latin America, offering perspectives from both the Global North and South.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House has reignited deep uncertainty about the trajectory of global development cooperation. Long before 2025, the multilateral system was already under pressure. But Trump’s second term marks a normative rupture: the retreat of the United States not just from global leadership, but from the very principles of internationalism, multilateralism, and development solidarity it once helped to construct. In response to this new reality, EADI and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) convened a diverse group of researchers to reflect on the implications of the “Trump 2.0 moment”. The result is a newly released EADI–IDOS Discussion Paper, Development and Development Policy in the Trump Era, which brings together sixteen concise contributions from scholars based across Europe, Asia, and Latin America, offering perspectives from both the Global North and South.
Green, circular buildings and their construction are essential for climate change mitigation and resource efficiency. However, the impact of a systematic shift towards green, circular buildings on employment in Sub-Saharan Africa remains unclear. Rwanda, particularly Kigali, is a relevant case due to its high urbanisation rate, pressing housing needs and political commitment to greening the economy. Currently, we do not know what types of green jobs exist in Kigali’s construction value chain or what potential they have for economic development. This paper addresses these questions using a sequential mixed-methods approach. We conducted 33 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with local experts and stakeholders. Based on these insights, we ran a survey with 546 firms across five construction value chain segments: planners/architects, material producers, material and equipment suppliers, construction/masonry firms, and firms installing energy, water, and wastewater technologies. Our analysis reveals four key findings: (1) a significant number of green jobs exist in the construction value chain, with varying degrees of greenness based on the number of environmentally-friendly practices performed (about are 5 per cent highly green and 58 per cent are partly green); (2) diverse green and circular practices are developing through both state support and grassroots initiatives; (3) greening is positively and significantly correlated with employment growth for highly green firms; and (4) greening is positively and significantly associated with improved job quality for all firms. For policy-makers, our results suggest that supporting firms in critical transition phases – those that have initiated greening but are not fully engaged – may enhance both job quantity and quality in the short to mid-term. Expanding green and circular, bio-based building practices across the construction sector requires a mix of interventions focused on cost competitiveness, skills and attitudes.
Dr Aimé Tsinda is Associate Professor, College of Science and Technology, at the University of Rwanda.
Erick Mujanama is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
Roger Mugisha is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
Green, circular buildings and their construction are essential for climate change mitigation and resource efficiency. However, the impact of a systematic shift towards green, circular buildings on employment in Sub-Saharan Africa remains unclear. Rwanda, particularly Kigali, is a relevant case due to its high urbanisation rate, pressing housing needs and political commitment to greening the economy. Currently, we do not know what types of green jobs exist in Kigali’s construction value chain or what potential they have for economic development. This paper addresses these questions using a sequential mixed-methods approach. We conducted 33 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with local experts and stakeholders. Based on these insights, we ran a survey with 546 firms across five construction value chain segments: planners/architects, material producers, material and equipment suppliers, construction/masonry firms, and firms installing energy, water, and wastewater technologies. Our analysis reveals four key findings: (1) a significant number of green jobs exist in the construction value chain, with varying degrees of greenness based on the number of environmentally-friendly practices performed (about are 5 per cent highly green and 58 per cent are partly green); (2) diverse green and circular practices are developing through both state support and grassroots initiatives; (3) greening is positively and significantly correlated with employment growth for highly green firms; and (4) greening is positively and significantly associated with improved job quality for all firms. For policy-makers, our results suggest that supporting firms in critical transition phases – those that have initiated greening but are not fully engaged – may enhance both job quantity and quality in the short to mid-term. Expanding green and circular, bio-based building practices across the construction sector requires a mix of interventions focused on cost competitiveness, skills and attitudes.
Dr Aimé Tsinda is Associate Professor, College of Science and Technology, at the University of Rwanda.
Erick Mujanama is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
Roger Mugisha is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
Green, circular buildings and their construction are essential for climate change mitigation and resource efficiency. However, the impact of a systematic shift towards green, circular buildings on employment in Sub-Saharan Africa remains unclear. Rwanda, particularly Kigali, is a relevant case due to its high urbanisation rate, pressing housing needs and political commitment to greening the economy. Currently, we do not know what types of green jobs exist in Kigali’s construction value chain or what potential they have for economic development. This paper addresses these questions using a sequential mixed-methods approach. We conducted 33 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with local experts and stakeholders. Based on these insights, we ran a survey with 546 firms across five construction value chain segments: planners/architects, material producers, material and equipment suppliers, construction/masonry firms, and firms installing energy, water, and wastewater technologies. Our analysis reveals four key findings: (1) a significant number of green jobs exist in the construction value chain, with varying degrees of greenness based on the number of environmentally-friendly practices performed (about are 5 per cent highly green and 58 per cent are partly green); (2) diverse green and circular practices are developing through both state support and grassroots initiatives; (3) greening is positively and significantly correlated with employment growth for highly green firms; and (4) greening is positively and significantly associated with improved job quality for all firms. For policy-makers, our results suggest that supporting firms in critical transition phases – those that have initiated greening but are not fully engaged – may enhance both job quantity and quality in the short to mid-term. Expanding green and circular, bio-based building practices across the construction sector requires a mix of interventions focused on cost competitiveness, skills and attitudes.
Dr Aimé Tsinda is Associate Professor, College of Science and Technology, at the University of Rwanda.
Erick Mujanama is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
Roger Mugisha is a consultant at Equilibria Ltd., Rwanda.
US-Präsident Donald Trump und EU-Kommissionspräsidentin Ursula von der Leyen haben sich gestern auf einen Handelsdeal geeinigt. Dazu eine Einschätzung von Ruben Staffa, Außenhandelsexperte und wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter der Abteilung Makroökonomie im Deutschen Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin):
Ein Handelskrieg zwischen den USA und der EU konnte abgewendet werden. Das ist angesichts der vorherigen Drohgebärden von US-Präsident Trump erstmal eine gute Nachricht. Doch die Einigung hat es in sich: 15 Prozent Einfuhrzölle auf europäische Warenausfuhren in die USA bedeuten knapp eine Verzehnfachung der durchschnittlichen Zölle, die vor Trumps zweiter Amtszeit galten. Hinzu kommen Zusagen Europas, im dreistelligen Milliardenbereich fossile Brennstoffe und Militärausrüstung in den USA einzukaufen. Hoffnungsvoll stimmt, dass für einige ausgewählte Gütergruppen gegenseitig keine Zölle erhoben werden sollen, darunter Halbleiterprodukte, die die USA dringend für die Chip-Herstellung benötigen. Vielleicht kommen auf diese Ausnahmeliste demnächst noch weitere Produkte. Vertragsdetails sind bisher nicht bekannt. Das gilt auch für viele der anderen Abkommen, die die USA in den vergangenen Wochen und Monaten geschlossen haben. Als regelbasierte Handelspolitik lässt sich dieses Vorgehen kaum bezeichnen. Es ist zu hoffen, dass die derzeit laufenden Untersuchungen zu Einfuhren von Pharmaprodukten nicht in produktspezifischen neuen Zöllen münden, denn diese würden Europa besonders treffen und den Wert der Einigung deutlich schmälern.
Der US-amerikanische Chiphersteller Intel hat die Pläne für eine Chip-Fabrik in Magdeburg endgültig aufgegeben. Dazu eine Einschätzung von Martin Gornig, Forschungsdirektor für Industriepolitik in der Abteilung Unternehmen und Märkte des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin):
Die geplante Ansiedlung von Intel in Magdeburg wäre ein zentraler Baustein für den Aufbau eigener Halbleiterkapazitäten gewesen. Angesichts geopolitischer Spannungen und globaler Abhängigkeiten – etwa bei Mikrochips – wird die Versorgungssicherheit bei einer solchen, für viele Produkte entscheidenden, Komponente immer dringlicher. Investitionssubventionen, wie sie im Fall von Intel staatlicherseits geflossen wären, sind deshalb quasi eine Versicherungsprämie gegen zukünftige Krisen. Deutschland und die EU müssen nun umso entschlossener den Aufbau eigener Kompetenzen zur Chipproduktion vorantreiben – etwa über Initiativen im Rahmen der Important Projects of Common European Interest (IPCEI), wie sie bereits in Dresden erfolgreich umgesetzt wurden.
The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In this paper we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms and institutional upheaval. We argue that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, nor is it only about money, but rather a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” – in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse – is in the offing. We ask what might come next.
The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In this paper we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms and institutional upheaval. We argue that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, nor is it only about money, but rather a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” – in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse – is in the offing. We ask what might come next.
The global system of development cooperation is in a state of flux. In this paper we discuss how and why the very foundations of international aid and development are being shaken by geopolitical shifts, contested norms and institutional upheaval. We argue that the crisis is not a mere cyclical downturn, nor is it only about money, but rather a fundamental reordering of the global development landscape. In short, a “tipping point” – in the sense of a dramatic moment when incremental changes coalesce into a transformative shift, for better or worse – is in the offing. We ask what might come next.
Im neuen Mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen (MFR) der EU sollen Gelder für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, humanitäre Hilfe und für EU-Beitrittskandidaten aus einem einzigen Finanzierungsinstrument kommen. Doch die Konzeption gleicht einem Jenga-Spiel, bei dem widersprüchliche Motivationen miteinander vereinbart werden sollen.
Im neuen Mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen (MFR) der EU sollen Gelder für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, humanitäre Hilfe und für EU-Beitrittskandidaten aus einem einzigen Finanzierungsinstrument kommen. Doch die Konzeption gleicht einem Jenga-Spiel, bei dem widersprüchliche Motivationen miteinander vereinbart werden sollen.
Im neuen Mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen (MFR) der EU sollen Gelder für Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, humanitäre Hilfe und für EU-Beitrittskandidaten aus einem einzigen Finanzierungsinstrument kommen. Doch die Konzeption gleicht einem Jenga-Spiel, bei dem widersprüchliche Motivationen miteinander vereinbart werden sollen.