Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

The transition towards a more sustainable world economy is a fact, as the internationally community has realized that business as usual practices will lead to ecological disasters, from global warming, loss of bio-diversity to the contamination of  maritime water bodies. Research, development and innovations are powerful tools to align the needs of a growing world population with the necessities of keeping global development within the planetary boundaries. There is, however, a huge and  growing - rather than diminishing - divide in both inputs and outputs to the science and innovation systems. Developing countries, which are most severely affected by the multiple ecological crises cannot invest very high financial and human  resources to address their specific challenges though research and development. This calls for determined international action and North-South cooperation in science, technology and innovation. The paper analyses the North-South divide in research  and development and discusses, how international cooperation may strengthen the capabilities of the Global South to respond to the challenges and, wherever possible, take advantage of new economic opportunities in a world transitioning towards  more sustainable growth patterns.

The transition towards a more sustainable world economy is a fact, as the internationally community has realized that business as usual practices will lead to ecological disasters, from global warming, loss of bio-diversity to the contamination of  maritime water bodies. Research, development and innovations are powerful tools to align the needs of a growing world population with the necessities of keeping global development within the planetary boundaries. There is, however, a huge and  growing - rather than diminishing - divide in both inputs and outputs to the science and innovation systems. Developing countries, which are most severely affected by the multiple ecological crises cannot invest very high financial and human  resources to address their specific challenges though research and development. This calls for determined international action and North-South cooperation in science, technology and innovation. The paper analyses the North-South divide in research  and development and discusses, how international cooperation may strengthen the capabilities of the Global South to respond to the challenges and, wherever possible, take advantage of new economic opportunities in a world transitioning towards  more sustainable growth patterns.

The transition towards a more sustainable world economy is a fact, as the internationally community has realized that business as usual practices will lead to ecological disasters, from global warming, loss of bio-diversity to the contamination of  maritime water bodies. Research, development and innovations are powerful tools to align the needs of a growing world population with the necessities of keeping global development within the planetary boundaries. There is, however, a huge and  growing - rather than diminishing - divide in both inputs and outputs to the science and innovation systems. Developing countries, which are most severely affected by the multiple ecological crises cannot invest very high financial and human  resources to address their specific challenges though research and development. This calls for determined international action and North-South cooperation in science, technology and innovation. The paper analyses the North-South divide in research  and development and discusses, how international cooperation may strengthen the capabilities of the Global South to respond to the challenges and, wherever possible, take advantage of new economic opportunities in a world transitioning towards  more sustainable growth patterns.

The transition towards a more sustainable world economy is a fact, as the internationally community has realized that business as usual practices will lead to ecological disasters, from global warming, loss of bio-diversity to the contamination of  maritime water bodies. Research, development and innovations are powerful tools to align the needs of a growing world population with the necessities of keeping global development within the planetary boundaries. There is, however, a huge and  growing - rather than diminishing - divide in both inputs and outputs to the science and innovation systems. Developing countries, which are most severely affected by the multiple ecological crises cannot invest very high financial and human  resources to address their specific challenges though research and development. This calls for determined international action and North-South cooperation in science, technology and innovation. The paper analyses the North-South divide in research  and development and discusses, how international cooperation may strengthen the capabilities of the Global South to respond to the challenges and, wherever possible, take advantage of new economic opportunities in a world transitioning towards  more sustainable growth patterns.

In recent years, global production of plastics has surged and is expected to increase further over the following years, with over a quarter being attributed to plastic packaging. Plastic packaging poses environmental risks due to the fossil fuels consumed in its production and the impact on eco-systems due to its inappropriate disposal. A large share of mismanaged plastic waste can be attributed to a few developing and emerging countries (DECs) in Asia. Their expected income and population growth, as well as associated increase in consumption and urbanisation, is expected to further strain inadequate waste management systems. In response, young ventures offering circular business models in packaging have emerged to tackle plastic packaging pollution. These ventures are embedded in an entrepreneurial ecosystem in which policies are, among others, determining enablers, and policy-makers have a key role in setting optimal framework conditions for circular business models in packaging to succeed. At the same time, policy agendas that address resource efficiency and the circular economy are on the rise in multiple DECs. For this reason, this paper addresses the question of the extent to which existing policies are supporting and enabling circular business models. This paper first discusses opportunities, risks, and challenges of existing circular business models in packaging in terms of waste hierarchy levels – reducing and dematerialising, reusing and refilling, replacing, and recycling – before examining the entrepreneurial ecosystems in which they operate. With a focus on policy as an enabler for circular business models in packaging, a holistic overview of possible policies in the circular packaging context is provided. Against this conceptual background, India is examined as a case-study. In recent years, multiple Indian start-ups have emerged, offering reusable packaging solutions or bio-based packaging alternatives, while other ventures seek to improve waste management and recycling. India’s previously introduced policies, including the Plastic Waste Management Rules, Swacch Bharat Mission, extended producer responsibility and a ban on single-use plastic, are the first stepping stones towards an enabling ecosystem for circular business models in packaging. However, this paper points out further opportunities – so far, India’s key policies have been addressing the downstream on the macro level. This study showed that macro-level policies need further enforcement and should be complemented by upstream policies. Meanwhile, meso-level and micro-level policies have been rather neglected. Policy-makers and development cooperation are encouraged to take action now, given the limited window of opportunity to establish a supporting framework for circular economies in development policy.

In recent years, global production of plastics has surged and is expected to increase further over the following years, with over a quarter being attributed to plastic packaging. Plastic packaging poses environmental risks due to the fossil fuels consumed in its production and the impact on eco-systems due to its inappropriate disposal. A large share of mismanaged plastic waste can be attributed to a few developing and emerging countries (DECs) in Asia. Their expected income and population growth, as well as associated increase in consumption and urbanisation, is expected to further strain inadequate waste management systems. In response, young ventures offering circular business models in packaging have emerged to tackle plastic packaging pollution. These ventures are embedded in an entrepreneurial ecosystem in which policies are, among others, determining enablers, and policy-makers have a key role in setting optimal framework conditions for circular business models in packaging to succeed. At the same time, policy agendas that address resource efficiency and the circular economy are on the rise in multiple DECs. For this reason, this paper addresses the question of the extent to which existing policies are supporting and enabling circular business models. This paper first discusses opportunities, risks, and challenges of existing circular business models in packaging in terms of waste hierarchy levels – reducing and dematerialising, reusing and refilling, replacing, and recycling – before examining the entrepreneurial ecosystems in which they operate. With a focus on policy as an enabler for circular business models in packaging, a holistic overview of possible policies in the circular packaging context is provided. Against this conceptual background, India is examined as a case-study. In recent years, multiple Indian start-ups have emerged, offering reusable packaging solutions or bio-based packaging alternatives, while other ventures seek to improve waste management and recycling. India’s previously introduced policies, including the Plastic Waste Management Rules, Swacch Bharat Mission, extended producer responsibility and a ban on single-use plastic, are the first stepping stones towards an enabling ecosystem for circular business models in packaging. However, this paper points out further opportunities – so far, India’s key policies have been addressing the downstream on the macro level. This study showed that macro-level policies need further enforcement and should be complemented by upstream policies. Meanwhile, meso-level and micro-level policies have been rather neglected. Policy-makers and development cooperation are encouraged to take action now, given the limited window of opportunity to establish a supporting framework for circular economies in development policy.

In recent years, global production of plastics has surged and is expected to increase further over the following years, with over a quarter being attributed to plastic packaging. Plastic packaging poses environmental risks due to the fossil fuels consumed in its production and the impact on eco-systems due to its inappropriate disposal. A large share of mismanaged plastic waste can be attributed to a few developing and emerging countries (DECs) in Asia. Their expected income and population growth, as well as associated increase in consumption and urbanisation, is expected to further strain inadequate waste management systems. In response, young ventures offering circular business models in packaging have emerged to tackle plastic packaging pollution. These ventures are embedded in an entrepreneurial ecosystem in which policies are, among others, determining enablers, and policy-makers have a key role in setting optimal framework conditions for circular business models in packaging to succeed. At the same time, policy agendas that address resource efficiency and the circular economy are on the rise in multiple DECs. For this reason, this paper addresses the question of the extent to which existing policies are supporting and enabling circular business models. This paper first discusses opportunities, risks, and challenges of existing circular business models in packaging in terms of waste hierarchy levels – reducing and dematerialising, reusing and refilling, replacing, and recycling – before examining the entrepreneurial ecosystems in which they operate. With a focus on policy as an enabler for circular business models in packaging, a holistic overview of possible policies in the circular packaging context is provided. Against this conceptual background, India is examined as a case-study. In recent years, multiple Indian start-ups have emerged, offering reusable packaging solutions or bio-based packaging alternatives, while other ventures seek to improve waste management and recycling. India’s previously introduced policies, including the Plastic Waste Management Rules, Swacch Bharat Mission, extended producer responsibility and a ban on single-use plastic, are the first stepping stones towards an enabling ecosystem for circular business models in packaging. However, this paper points out further opportunities – so far, India’s key policies have been addressing the downstream on the macro level. This study showed that macro-level policies need further enforcement and should be complemented by upstream policies. Meanwhile, meso-level and micro-level policies have been rather neglected. Policy-makers and development cooperation are encouraged to take action now, given the limited window of opportunity to establish a supporting framework for circular economies in development policy.

Die Wasser-Konferenz der Vereinten Nationen will Wege zur nachhaltigen Nutzung der Ressource aufzeigen. Dazu ein Statement von Astrid Cullmann, wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin der Abteilung Energie, Verkehr, Umwelt im DIW Berlin:

 

Die Tatsache, dass sich die Vereinten Nationen mit ihrem Wassergipfel zum ersten Mal seit fast 50 Jahren ausschließlich mit der wertvollen Ressource Wasser beschäftigen, zeigt: Wir stehen vor enormen Herausforderungen. Nicht nur im globalen Süden ist die Lage alarmierend, auch in Deutschland wird Wasser durch einen Überverbrauch und Schadstoffbelastungen in manchen Regionen immer knapper.

Zahlreiche Regionen wie unter anderem Brandenburg müssen sich darauf einstellen, dass es durch den Klimawandel trockener und heißer wird. Dadurch steigt zum Beispiel der Wasserbedarf für die landwirtschaftliche Bewässerung, während das -angebot sinkt. Um künftig Wassernutzungskonflikte zu vermeiden, müssen gezielte Maßnahmen ergriffen werden. Dazu zählen mehr Transparenz und Kontrolle der Wasserentnahme. Insbesondere sollte die Vorzugsbehandlung der Industrie, die derzeit große Mengen Wasser zu sehr niedrigen Preisen verbraucht, aufgehoben werden.

Ein weiteres Problem ist die Wasserverschmutzung durch Spuren- und Nährstoffe von Düngemitteln und Kläranlagenabläufen. Die intensive Landwirtschaft ist Hauptverursacher der Nährstoffeinträge, die durch stickstoffhaltigen Dünger auf landwirtschaftlichen Flächen in die Umwelt gelangen. Um die Nitratbelastung zu reduzieren, müssen bereits bestehende verschärfte Vorgaben zur Düngung konsequent umgesetzt werden, insbesondere in den ohnehin schon nitratbelasteten Zonen. Zudem kann Ökolandbau einen Beitrag leisten, Überdüngung zu reduzieren, wie Studien des DIW Berlin gezeigt haben.

Auch in der wissenschaftlichen Forschung finden Wasserknappheit und Wasserverschmutzung überraschend wenig Beachtung – vor allem im Vergleich zur Luftverschmutzung. Es bleibt zu hoffen, dass der UN-Wassergipfel wachrüttelt und Impulse zur nachhaltigen Nutzung gibt.

Rebuilding Ukraine starts now – even if it is being undertaken against a backdrop of conflict, violence and destruction, with Russia continuing to wage its war of aggression. In granting Ukraine European Union (EU) candidate status, the EU has also made the country’s recovery one of its own priorities. If this reconstruction project is to succeed, then it is necessary to take into account specific contextual conditions, along with experiences from other recovery processes, such as those in the Western Balkans and Iraq.
• Functional statehood: Ukraine is better placed in this regard than many other countries, particularly given the functional and widely accepted statehood throughout much of its territory. Reconstruction assistance can kick-start a forward-looking, sustainable green transformation in the economy and society. At the same time, there is a risk that massive external cash flows could feed old networks of corruption and patronage and create new ones. Clear accountability structures are required, along with sanctions for the misuse of funds, if this is to be counteracted.
• Agile planning over linear phase model: Rebuilding work is taking place in an atmosphere of great uncertainty. Consequently, planning processes must be flexible in order to adapt to different war scenarios. A linear sequence of recovery phases fails to properly address the situation. This is already visible when it comes to efforts to secure critical infrastructure. Its proper functioning is essential to people’s daily lives and to all forms of reconstruction, yet this infrastructure could become a target for attacks again at any time.
• Ukraine as a self-confident partner: As a result of the war’s trajectory, the Ukrainian Government is adopting a self-assured demeanour in its dealings with international donors. While this is essentially a positive thing, it can also give rise to a resistance to reform. The prospect of EU accession creates a common objective to work towards and can also establish coherent criteria for the recovery process, but only as long as accession remains a credible prospect.
• Managing reconstruction assistance: Recovery funds have proven an effective means of coordination, though it remains to be seen whether there will be a single fund or several complementary ones. A central Ukraine fund should be (co-)managed on the donor end by the European Commission, as it has at its disposal the strongest reform incentive, namely EU accession. In the meantime, the EU needs to ensure that the Commission and the member states also provide the majority of the funding between them.
• Diversity and inclusion: The governance structures of the reconstruction project should be designed to afford participation and a say to pluralist political institutions and civil society voices, and strengthen gender equality. In order to counter brain-drain, it is also imperative that young, mobile population groups (including refugees abroad) feel included.
• Social equity: Incorporating social factors into the recovery process will also be essential. Vulnerable groups will require particular support, given the alarming level of impoverishment among the population as a result of the war.
• Investment incentives: Essential reconstruction services have to be provided by the private sector. This requires that clear incentives be created, not least by providing investment guarantees.
• Developing trauma sensitivity: The rebuilding work is taking place in a context of violence and trauma. This requires that all stakeholders develop a particular sensitivity in dealing with survivors of violence and engaging with a traumatised society. 

Rebuilding Ukraine starts now – even if it is being undertaken against a backdrop of conflict, violence and destruction, with Russia continuing to wage its war of aggression. In granting Ukraine European Union (EU) candidate status, the EU has also made the country’s recovery one of its own priorities. If this reconstruction project is to succeed, then it is necessary to take into account specific contextual conditions, along with experiences from other recovery processes, such as those in the Western Balkans and Iraq.
• Functional statehood: Ukraine is better placed in this regard than many other countries, particularly given the functional and widely accepted statehood throughout much of its territory. Reconstruction assistance can kick-start a forward-looking, sustainable green transformation in the economy and society. At the same time, there is a risk that massive external cash flows could feed old networks of corruption and patronage and create new ones. Clear accountability structures are required, along with sanctions for the misuse of funds, if this is to be counteracted.
• Agile planning over linear phase model: Rebuilding work is taking place in an atmosphere of great uncertainty. Consequently, planning processes must be flexible in order to adapt to different war scenarios. A linear sequence of recovery phases fails to properly address the situation. This is already visible when it comes to efforts to secure critical infrastructure. Its proper functioning is essential to people’s daily lives and to all forms of reconstruction, yet this infrastructure could become a target for attacks again at any time.
• Ukraine as a self-confident partner: As a result of the war’s trajectory, the Ukrainian Government is adopting a self-assured demeanour in its dealings with international donors. While this is essentially a positive thing, it can also give rise to a resistance to reform. The prospect of EU accession creates a common objective to work towards and can also establish coherent criteria for the recovery process, but only as long as accession remains a credible prospect.
• Managing reconstruction assistance: Recovery funds have proven an effective means of coordination, though it remains to be seen whether there will be a single fund or several complementary ones. A central Ukraine fund should be (co-)managed on the donor end by the European Commission, as it has at its disposal the strongest reform incentive, namely EU accession. In the meantime, the EU needs to ensure that the Commission and the member states also provide the majority of the funding between them.
• Diversity and inclusion: The governance structures of the reconstruction project should be designed to afford participation and a say to pluralist political institutions and civil society voices, and strengthen gender equality. In order to counter brain-drain, it is also imperative that young, mobile population groups (including refugees abroad) feel included.
• Social equity: Incorporating social factors into the recovery process will also be essential. Vulnerable groups will require particular support, given the alarming level of impoverishment among the population as a result of the war.
• Investment incentives: Essential reconstruction services have to be provided by the private sector. This requires that clear incentives be created, not least by providing investment guarantees.
• Developing trauma sensitivity: The rebuilding work is taking place in a context of violence and trauma. This requires that all stakeholders develop a particular sensitivity in dealing with survivors of violence and engaging with a traumatised society. 

Rebuilding Ukraine starts now – even if it is being undertaken against a backdrop of conflict, violence and destruction, with Russia continuing to wage its war of aggression. In granting Ukraine European Union (EU) candidate status, the EU has also made the country’s recovery one of its own priorities. If this reconstruction project is to succeed, then it is necessary to take into account specific contextual conditions, along with experiences from other recovery processes, such as those in the Western Balkans and Iraq.
• Functional statehood: Ukraine is better placed in this regard than many other countries, particularly given the functional and widely accepted statehood throughout much of its territory. Reconstruction assistance can kick-start a forward-looking, sustainable green transformation in the economy and society. At the same time, there is a risk that massive external cash flows could feed old networks of corruption and patronage and create new ones. Clear accountability structures are required, along with sanctions for the misuse of funds, if this is to be counteracted.
• Agile planning over linear phase model: Rebuilding work is taking place in an atmosphere of great uncertainty. Consequently, planning processes must be flexible in order to adapt to different war scenarios. A linear sequence of recovery phases fails to properly address the situation. This is already visible when it comes to efforts to secure critical infrastructure. Its proper functioning is essential to people’s daily lives and to all forms of reconstruction, yet this infrastructure could become a target for attacks again at any time.
• Ukraine as a self-confident partner: As a result of the war’s trajectory, the Ukrainian Government is adopting a self-assured demeanour in its dealings with international donors. While this is essentially a positive thing, it can also give rise to a resistance to reform. The prospect of EU accession creates a common objective to work towards and can also establish coherent criteria for the recovery process, but only as long as accession remains a credible prospect.
• Managing reconstruction assistance: Recovery funds have proven an effective means of coordination, though it remains to be seen whether there will be a single fund or several complementary ones. A central Ukraine fund should be (co-)managed on the donor end by the European Commission, as it has at its disposal the strongest reform incentive, namely EU accession. In the meantime, the EU needs to ensure that the Commission and the member states also provide the majority of the funding between them.
• Diversity and inclusion: The governance structures of the reconstruction project should be designed to afford participation and a say to pluralist political institutions and civil society voices, and strengthen gender equality. In order to counter brain-drain, it is also imperative that young, mobile population groups (including refugees abroad) feel included.
• Social equity: Incorporating social factors into the recovery process will also be essential. Vulnerable groups will require particular support, given the alarming level of impoverishment among the population as a result of the war.
• Investment incentives: Essential reconstruction services have to be provided by the private sector. This requires that clear incentives be created, not least by providing investment guarantees.
• Developing trauma sensitivity: The rebuilding work is taking place in a context of violence and trauma. This requires that all stakeholders develop a particular sensitivity in dealing with survivors of violence and engaging with a traumatised society. 

Die Dienstleistungsgewerkschaft Verdi und die Eisenbahn- und Verkehrsgewerkschaft (EVG) haben für kommenden Montag zu einem gemeinsamen bundesweiten Warnstreik aufgerufen. Die aktuellen Arbeitskämpfe kommentiert Marcel Fratzscher, Präsident des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin), wie folgt:

 

Wir erleben zurzeit eine Wende auf dem Arbeitsmarkt: Die Zeiten eines Arbeitgebermarktes, in dem Arbeitgeber*innen Löhne und Arbeitsbedingungen mehr oder weniger diktieren konnten, scheinen vorbei. Der Arbeitsmarkt entwickelt sich zu einem Arbeitnehmer*innenmarkt. Bereits heute gibt es in Deutschland zwei Millionen offene Stellen und eine riesige Fachkräftelücke, die sich in den kommenden zehn Jahren noch vergrößern wird. Viele Arbeitgeber*innen wollen diese Tatsache noch nicht wahrhaben und fordern mehr „Bock auf Arbeit“, höhere Arbeitszeiten und geringere Lohnsteigerungen.  

Der Arbeitskampf und der Mega-Streik im Verkehrssektor am kommenden Montag sind das logische Resultat dieser Zeitenwende. Ich erwarte für die kommenden Jahre eine deutliche Zunahme der Arbeitskämpfe in Deutschland. Es liegt in der Natur der Sache, dass diese Arbeitskämpfe auch signifikante Kosten mit sich bringen. Der beste Weg, um diese Kosten und die Arbeitskämpfe zu begrenzen, ist eine Stärkung der Sozialpartnerschaften. Der Staat wird eine wichtige Rolle spielen, um vor allem die verletzlichsten Arbeitnehmer*innen besser zu schützen. Dazu werden unweigerlich weitere deutliche Anhebungen des Mindestlohns gehören, zudem müssen Tarifabschlüsse für einzelne Branchen häufiger für allgemeinverbindlich erklärt werden.

Wenn all das gelingt, können sich Lohnerhöhungen über die kommenden Jahre positiv auf Beschäftigung, Wachstum und Wohlstand in Deutschland auswirken. Denn deutliche Lohnsteigerungen, vor allem für Menschen mit geringen Einkommen, stabilisieren die Nachfrage und helfen damit auch den Unternehmen. Sie entlasten die Sozialsysteme und helfen, den sozialen Frieden zu sichern. Und deutliche Lohnsteigerungen sind essenziell, um die Produktivität zu verbessern und um die erhebliche stille Reserve im deutschen Arbeitsmarkt heben zu helfen. Eine Lohn-Preis-Spirale droht nicht – sie ist ein Mythos. Die Beschäftigten mussten 2022 im Durchschnitt Reallohnverluste von drei Prozent hinnehmen, 2023 werden es wohl nochmals zwei Prozent oder mehr sein. Für keine der Branchen in Deutschland kann behauptet werden, dass Forderungen der Beschäftigten überzogen sind, auch nicht im öffentlichen Dienst, wo die geforderten Lohnerhöhungen noch nicht einmal die Inflation in den Jahren 2022 und 2023 ausgleichen. Dagegen haben große Konzerne ihre Gewinne deutlich erhöht. Analysen der EZB zeigen, dass der Anstieg der Gewinne alleine 2022 einen doppelt so großen Beitrag zur Inflation geleistet hat wie die Lohnerhöhungen, gerade in der Industrie.

Die am DIW Berlin angesiedelte forschungsbasierte Infrastruktureinrichtung Sozio-oekonomisches Panel (SOEP) sucht zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt zwei studentische Hilfskräfte (m/w/div) für 10 Wochenstunden.

With the SDGs, countries agreed that Peace, Planet, Partnership, Prosperity and People are connected. To maximise synergies and minimize trade-offs, their interactions need to be better understood. While 'SDG interlinkages' are increasingly studied, SDG 16 is rarely covered. This new publication builds on the first, ground-breaking study ‘Connections that Matter: How the Quality of Governance Institutions may be the Booster Shot we need to reduce Poverty and Inequality’ on the interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequality). UNDP's Oslo Governance Centre and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) have now released this second study on interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). Based on a scoping literature review of 300+ academic papers, the study finds empirical evidence from across the globe that inclusion and participation, accountability and rule of law, as well as transparency and control of corruption and crime can improve the effectiveness of marine and coastal protection efforts and contribute towards the sustainability of fisheries. The study highlights a number of examples, including how governance can regulation, management and enforcement tends to improve marine park conservation whereas lack of enforcement can lead to ‘paper parks’. This publication offers initial policy insights on how to identify and activate governance levers to accelerate progress on SDG 14.

With the SDGs, countries agreed that Peace, Planet, Partnership, Prosperity and People are connected. To maximise synergies and minimize trade-offs, their interactions need to be better understood. While 'SDG interlinkages' are increasingly studied, SDG 16 is rarely covered. This new publication builds on the first, ground-breaking study ‘Connections that Matter: How the Quality of Governance Institutions may be the Booster Shot we need to reduce Poverty and Inequality’ on the interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequality). UNDP's Oslo Governance Centre and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) have now released this second study on interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). Based on a scoping literature review of 300+ academic papers, the study finds empirical evidence from across the globe that inclusion and participation, accountability and rule of law, as well as transparency and control of corruption and crime can improve the effectiveness of marine and coastal protection efforts and contribute towards the sustainability of fisheries. The study highlights a number of examples, including how governance can regulation, management and enforcement tends to improve marine park conservation whereas lack of enforcement can lead to ‘paper parks’. This publication offers initial policy insights on how to identify and activate governance levers to accelerate progress on SDG 14.

With the SDGs, countries agreed that Peace, Planet, Partnership, Prosperity and People are connected. To maximise synergies and minimize trade-offs, their interactions need to be better understood. While 'SDG interlinkages' are increasingly studied, SDG 16 is rarely covered. This new publication builds on the first, ground-breaking study ‘Connections that Matter: How the Quality of Governance Institutions may be the Booster Shot we need to reduce Poverty and Inequality’ on the interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequality). UNDP's Oslo Governance Centre and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) have now released this second study on interlinkages between SDG 16 and SDG 14 (Life Below Water). Based on a scoping literature review of 300+ academic papers, the study finds empirical evidence from across the globe that inclusion and participation, accountability and rule of law, as well as transparency and control of corruption and crime can improve the effectiveness of marine and coastal protection efforts and contribute towards the sustainability of fisheries. The study highlights a number of examples, including how governance can regulation, management and enforcement tends to improve marine park conservation whereas lack of enforcement can lead to ‘paper parks’. This publication offers initial policy insights on how to identify and activate governance levers to accelerate progress on SDG 14.

Für die Stabsstelle Recht suchen wir zum nächstmöglichen Zeitpunkt eine*n Juristische*n Referent*in (m/w/div) (in Vollzeit, Teilzeit ist möglich) für die vollumfängliche Rechtsberatung des Vorstands und Abteilungen des Instituts.

International observers link many hopes for global sustainable development to the use of green hydrogen. Hydrogen produced via electrolysis and using renewable energies is a carbon-free energy carrier and feedstock for several industrial processes, e.g. in steel production and petrochemistry. To date, the application of hydrogen for fertiliser production has received insufficient attention. Globally and for the developing world, it offers at least a "triple win option": greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas-based fertiliser production can be avoided, developing countries may save foreign currency, which is today used for importing gas from, e.g. Russia. Finally, farmers may become less exposed to fluctuations in natural gas prices. An assured supply of fertilisers produced with local renewable energies can be an important element of food security. The article discusses the options and uncertainties related to green hydrogen production and digs deeper into the options of fertiliser production.

International observers link many hopes for global sustainable development to the use of green hydrogen. Hydrogen produced via electrolysis and using renewable energies is a carbon-free energy carrier and feedstock for several industrial processes, e.g. in steel production and petrochemistry. To date, the application of hydrogen for fertiliser production has received insufficient attention. Globally and for the developing world, it offers at least a "triple win option": greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas-based fertiliser production can be avoided, developing countries may save foreign currency, which is today used for importing gas from, e.g. Russia. Finally, farmers may become less exposed to fluctuations in natural gas prices. An assured supply of fertilisers produced with local renewable energies can be an important element of food security. The article discusses the options and uncertainties related to green hydrogen production and digs deeper into the options of fertiliser production.

International observers link many hopes for global sustainable development to the use of green hydrogen. Hydrogen produced via electrolysis and using renewable energies is a carbon-free energy carrier and feedstock for several industrial processes, e.g. in steel production and petrochemistry. To date, the application of hydrogen for fertiliser production has received insufficient attention. Globally and for the developing world, it offers at least a "triple win option": greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas-based fertiliser production can be avoided, developing countries may save foreign currency, which is today used for importing gas from, e.g. Russia. Finally, farmers may become less exposed to fluctuations in natural gas prices. An assured supply of fertilisers produced with local renewable energies can be an important element of food security. The article discusses the options and uncertainties related to green hydrogen production and digs deeper into the options of fertiliser production.