Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

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.

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.

Mit steigender Inflation sind laut Statistischem Bundesamt die Reallöhne im ersten Quartal 2022 um 1,8 Prozent gesunken. Welche Maßnahmen die Politik nun ergreifen muss, um die Auswirkungen vor allem für die unteren Einkommensschichten abzumildern, kommentiert Marcel Fratzscher, Präsident des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin), wie folgt:

Die Inflation in Deutschland ist so hoch wie seit 50 Jahren nicht mehr, und dies lässt nun auch die Reallöhne sinken. Wir erleben eine höchst unsoziale Inflation, da gerade Menschen mit geringen Einkommen besonders stark durch höhere Preise für Energie und Lebensmittel belastet werden. Eine Studie am DIW Berlin zeigt, dass sich für Menschen mit sehr geringen Einkommen die steigenden Energiepreise relativ zu ihrem Einkommen drei- bis viermal so stark niederschlagen wie für Menschen mit hohen Einkommen.

Die Politik ist in der Pflicht und muss deutlich mehr tun, um die sozialen Härten der Inflation abzufedern. Die EZB sollte sehr bald die Zinsen erhöhen, auch wenn dies in diesem und nächsten Jahr nur wenig an der hohen Inflation ändern wird. Die Bundesregierung wiederum muss sehr viel zielgenauer als bisher die am härtesten betroffenen Menschen unterstützen und entlasten. Das Entlastungspaket der Bundesregierung war bisher nicht zielgenau genug und teilweise sogar kontraproduktiv. Die Spritpreisbremse ist eine Umverteilung von Arm zu Reich und konterkariert den Klimaschutz. Außerdem erhalten zu viele bedürftige Menschen, allen voran Rentnerinnen und Rentner, kaum Unterstützung.

Die Bundesregierung sollte nun ein kluges Entlastungspaket planen, mit dem ausschließlich Menschen mit geringen und mittleren Einkommen entlastet werden. Familien mit geringen Einkommen sollten nicht nur einmalig, sondern permanent entlastet werden. Ein Anstieg des Mindestlohns auf zwölf Euro ist das wichtigste Instrument für die zehn Millionen Beschäftigten im Niedriglohnbereich, auch um sich gegen die steigenden Preise zu schützen. Der Staat muss zudem dringend die Sozialleistungen erhöhen und beispielsweise den Hartz-IV-Satz sowie die Grundsicherung um 100 bis 150 Euro monatlich anheben. Den Spielraum hat sie, da sich mit steigender Inflation auch die Steuereinahmen erhöhen.

Und wir sollten uns darüber im Klaren sein, dass die Spitze des Inflationsanstiegs vermutlich noch nicht erreicht ist. Ich befürchte, dass wir das Risiko einer weiteren Eskalation des Krieges ebenso unterschätzen wie die Gefahr einer weiteren Corona-Welle.

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.

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.

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.
 

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.
 

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 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.