Search

Begin New Search Topic International Cooperation Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Special Report Publication Year within 25 Years

11. Allocation of Climate-Related Risks in Investor–State Mining Contracts

Author:
Martin Dietrich Brauch, Perrine Toledano, and Cody Aceveda
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
As the effects of climate change continue to worsen, mining projects, the communities surrounding them, and their host states are increasingly at risk of being affected by environmental disasters, with devastating social and economic consequences. Risk allocation provisions included in investor–state mining contracts, often considered boilerplate and replicated in agreements without careful consideration or negotiation, could potentially help the parties assign responsibilities between themselves and limit their losses in those cases. However, traditional risk allocation clauses within existing mining contracts, formulated before the world acknowledged the severity of climate change, do not adequately allocate climate-related risks and impacts between states and companies.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, United Nations, and Risk
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. Public Views of Migration in MENA

Author:
Mohamed Abufalgha
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Arab Barometer
Abstract:
Across the Middle East and North Africa, sizable proportions of citizens are considering leaving their home countries. Desire to emigrate is high across the region and has largely remained at the pre-COVID19 levels. In most countries surveyed, at least a fifth of the population reports considering emigrating. The percentage is highest in Jordan where nearly half (48 percent) say they want to leave the kingdom, and lowest in Egypt where only 13 percent share this desire. Those who want to emigrate are more likely to be male, young, well-educated segments of the population, respectively. Youth across the region are significantly more likely to say they consider leaving their countries compared to their older counterparts. The gap between those ages 18-29 and those who are 30 years or older ranges from 32 points in Lebanon to six points in Mauritania. Similarly, those with college degrees or higher are more likely to want to emigrate compared to those with only a secondary education or less in all countries surveyed. The gap between the two groups is significant in several countries, especially in Sudan where it reaches the 26-point mark. Furthermore, men are more eager to leave than women in all countries except Lebanon, where both are equally interested in emigrating. People across MENA name a number of reasons for wanting to emigrate. The most commonly cited reason is for economic issues. The majority of potential migrants in all countries surveyed mention economic factors as the primary reason why they want to leave. These levels range from virtually all potential migrants in Egypt (97 percent) and Jordan (93 percent) to more than half in Libya (53 percent). While other reasons, including security factors, political reasons, and educational opportunities, are mentioned by minorities across the region; these reasons seem to correlate with each country’s political atmosphere, rather than being recurring themes across MENA. Potential migrants in MENA do not seem to agree on a destination. In no country is there a majority choosing one country as a preferred destination. Several factors contribute to people’s preferences. These factors include historical trends of migration, language, proximity, and perceived opportunities. While Jordanians, Lebanese, and Mauritanians prefer a move to North America, Egyptians and Sudanese prefer a Gulf country. North Africans tend to choose France or another European country as their preferred destinations.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Migration, and Immigration
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. Getting the Balance Right: Refining the Strategic Application of Nonproliferation Sanctions

Author:
Alistair Millar, George A. Lopez, David Cortright, and Linda Gerber
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Fourth Freedom Forum
Abstract:
This paper argues for a greater commitment to sanctions that fit the reality of each discrete case of proliferation, nimble diplomacy that includes incentives-based bargaining, and strategies for reciprocal threat reduction to reduce nuclear dangers and enhance international cooperation for peace and security.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Sanctions, Nonproliferation, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

14. Five Years After the Adoption of the Paris Agreement, Are Climate Change Considerations Reflected in Mining Contracts?

Author:
Tehtena Mebratu-Tsegaye, Perrine Toledano, Martin Dietrich Brauch, and Mara Greenberg
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
At the 2015 Paris Climate Change Conference, the world’s governments set an ambitious goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 °C over pre-industrial levels. To meet this goal, global anthropogenic CO2 emissions must decline steadily and reach net zero by about 2050.2 The pathway to a low-carbon future requires a fundamental shift away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy technologies. This transition will be mineral-intensive: the World Bank estimates that the production of minerals could increase by more than 450% by 2050 to meet the growing demand for clean energy technologies.3 How these minerals are produced will have a lasting effect on the clean energy transition. The mining and metal sector contributes 4–7% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions globally.4 Without adequate regulation to incentivize climate- friendly sustainable operations, increases in mineral extraction risk increasing the sector’s carbon footprint.5 In addition, climate change acts as a risk multiplier by increasing the risk of flooding, drought, and landslides and, as such, exacerbates the negative externalities caused by poor mining practices. First and foremost, climate change considerations should be incorporated into the climate, environmental, water, forestry, energy, or mining laws of mineral-rich countries. For example, in 2016, Kenya passed a climate law that requires climate mainstreaming in all sectors.6 Guinea’s 2019 Environmental Code encourages the use of renewable energy wherever possible and mandates the environment minister to implement the National Strategy for Climate Change Adaptation.7 But the pace of legislative processes is often slow—and in countries where the legislation does not include climate change mitigation and adaptation requirements,8 countries may turn to contractual provi- sions to compel the mining sector to shift to climate- sensitive practices. This paper assesses the extent to which this is being done through an analysis of all publicly available mining contracts signed by fragile states in Africa9 after the adoption of the Paris Agreement in December 2015 that appear on ResourceContracts.org (21 contracts).10 Though the magnitude of African fragile states’ contri- bution to global GHG emissions is minimal, these states have a comparatively high degree of vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.11 In this context, governments can and should mobilize the mining sector to play a meaningful role in meeting their climate mitigation and adaptation needs and those of project-affected communities. In addition, the increased demand for critical minerals to produce renewable energy and battery solutions tends to increase investment flows into the mining sector of several of those fragile states,12 making it all the more crucial for their governments to ensure that new mining investments support each country’s sustainable development goals. Doing so, with respect to climate action, furthers both a country’s competitiveness in international markets13 and minimize the mining sector’s footprint on the country’s environment and communities. Though our analysis focuses on contracts concluded by fragile states in Africa, the policy recommendations that we draw from their analysis apply to all host governments that do not already have robust laws that operationalize mitigation and adaptation goals and are eager to leverage and strengthen the role of their mining sectors in achieving sustainable development. Our recommendations envision generating long-term savings over the life of the mines, even if some of those recommendations may in practice represent higher upfront costs for mining companies. For example, adopting renewable energy sources, though possibly more expensive at the outset, is more cost-effective than fossil fuels considering the life of a mine.14 Avoiding deforestation early on also generates savings for mining companies when the time comes to fulfill their mine closure and rehabilitation obligations. Furthermore, by supporting community efforts to build resilience to climate change, mining companies have the opportunity to meaningfully contribute to project-affected communities. Attention to climate change considerations that entail higher expenditures by mining investors at the initial stages of the operation of a mine also tend to reduce the tax revenues from mining for host governments in the short term. However, for governments, too, the long-term benefits outweigh the initial revenue reductions. As long as governments put strong progressive fiscal regimes in place,15 they will be able to reap the upside from a climate- aware, low-carbon mining sector that will be more profitable than a business-as-usual, carbon-intensive mining sector in the medium to long term.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. Comparison Between the IPCC Reporting Framework and Country Practice

Author:
Jiarui Chen and Martin Dietrich Brauch
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
The 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines (IPCC 2008) for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC Guidelines) provide a recommend- ed (but not mandatory) methodology for preparing Na- tional Inventory Reports (NIR), which all Annex I Parties2 to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) must submit every year (Romijn et al. 2019). In practice, however, many countries apply modi- fied methodologies in their NIRs to reflect country-specif- ic situations better. While helpful in addressing country specificities, those modified methodologies may result in emission data that is less standardized and therefore harder to compare and consolidate. Also, the IPCC recom- mends that countries adopt higher tier methods and use more granular data. Since different emissions categorized by the IPCC3 can be calculated by multiple methods, and the granularity and quality of country emissions databas- es vary, different countries adopt different granularity lev- els and tier methods (IPCC 2008). The 160 Non-Annex I Parties to the UNFCCC (most of them developing countries) are not required to submit NIRs every year, but must submit Biennial Update Re- ports (BURs), including a national inventory report and information on mitigation actions, needs, and support re- ceived (Kainou 2016). Following the same IPCC Guidelines as NIRs, BURs are different from NIRs mainly in terms of reporting scope. The IPCC Guidelines require countries to report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in NIRs from 1980 to the latest reporting period, while for BURs they merely encourage countries to submit summary informa- tion tables of inventories for previous submission years.4 Besides the required BURs, more Non-Annex I Parties have been submitting NIRs and Technical Annexes on REDD+ in recent years (Romijn et al. 2019). In 2020, 23 Non-Annex I Parties submitted NIRs (UNFCCC 2020). We recommend that the IPCC adopt, based on a man- date from the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, a consolidated framework to indicate best practice for each emissions category. A consolidated framework would help unify the granularity levels and standards across all coun- tries’ NIRs. It could also be extended to countries that have not adopted the IPCC Guidelines or published NIRs. Since an increasing number of Non-Annex I Parties are submit- ting NIRs to the UNFCCC, it is crucial to have a widely appli- cable framework that developing countries can also use. A consolidated framework would also make it easier for countries to communicate their emissions reductions goals in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. With the Paris Agreement, countries established an enhanced transparency framework (ETF): starting in 2024, countries will report transparently on actions taken and progress in climate change mitigation, adaptation measures, and support provided or received. It also provides for interna- tional procedures for the review of the submitted NIRs. A standardized reporting framework for NIRs would comply with the requirement of transparency framework under Paris Agreement (Winkler et al. 2017). To exemplify how a consolidated framework would work, after a background note on scopes and approaches in greenhouse gas reporting (section 1), we present the re- sults of our empirical research on the NIRs of Australia, Germany, Japan, and the United States, focusing on the differences in the choice of methodology (section 2) and emission factors (section 3). Then we conduct a case study on the German iron and steel industry, exploring the dif- ferences in emission reporting under different methods (section 4). Finally, we study the case of China, which has submitted BURs but not yet published annual NIRs, to understand how the IPCC Guidelines could be applied to more countries (section 5). We outline our findings and recommendations in section 6.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. The Digital Decide: How to Agree on WTO Rules for Digital Trade

Author:
James Bacchus
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
After more than 20 years of unsuccessful negotiations, WTO member countries may be able to agree on global digital trade rules if they look to the new Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA) among Chile, New Zealand and Singapore as a model. As the first “digital only” trade agreement, the DEPA offers a modular approach that allows members to pick and choose which modules work best for them today while enabling them to adopt more legal commitments on digital trade in the future. As cross-border trade becomes increasingly digital, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuring the free movement of goods and services is essential to the global economy.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, World Trade Organization, and Digital Economy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

17. Future Scenarios for Global Mobility in the Shadow of Pandemic

Author:
Meghan Benton
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has had an undeniable and wide-ranging impact on human mobility of all kinds—from travel for work or study to family reunification to refugee resettlement. More than 18 months since the first round of travel restrictions were introduced, it remains to be seen when and how fully these different forms of mobility will recover. This report explores possible scenarios for what international mobility could look like in two to three years as an exercise to help national governments and international organizations think through the potential impacts of different policy choices and approaches to pandemic management. It also identifies critical questions to address in the coming months and years, such as: What tools should be used in conjunction with vaccines to safely reopen travel, given concerns that the uneven vaccine rollout will deepen existing inequalities in access to mobility? And how can countries better coordinate health screening requirements to minimize unnecessary duplication and costs to travelers? Returning to the pre-pandemic status quo for travel and migration seems highly unlikely, and the structures that are being built now will shape mobility systems and responses to future disease outbreaks for years to come. A key priority, the author writes, should be to outgrow the current picture of fragmented, frequently shifting policies in favor of transparent, equitable, and risk-proportionate rules.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Migration, Governance, Mobility, Public Health, COVID-19, and Travel
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. COVID-19: A Stress Test for International Development Cooperation

Author:
Stefano Manservisi
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
As the Coronavirus pandemic expands, and peak contagion remains uncertain, policy responses are gradually emerging, being implemented in a number of domains. The crisis has several important implications, but two are currently dominating the headlines: individual health and the sustainability of national healthcare systems, and the economic fallout from the pandemic.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Finance, International Development, Development Aid, and Coronavirus
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, and Global Focus

19. Global Governance in 2030: Prospective Scenarios on the Future of Politics

Author:
Julia Pomares and María Belén Abdala
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for the Implementation of Public Policies for Equity and Growth (CIPPEC)
Abstract:
We are living in an era of unprecedented changes. Mature democracies, emerging polities and the least electorally competitive countries are now facing new challenges in a globalized world. They are all dealing with technological breakthroughs, changes in global economic power, ageing populations and urbanization of their territories. Today’s picture shows that social inclusion seems to be an unfulfilled promise, and social cohesion is weakening. Some citizens are disenchanted, and political systems are having trouble adapting and responding to new demands. According to Edelman’s Trust Barometer (2017), one in every two countries does not have faith in the system, and we still do not know how this picture is going to evolve. In democracies, pro-democracy attitudes coexist with openness to nondemocratic forms of governance, such as rule by experts (49 per cent), strong leaders (26 per cent) or the military (24 per cent). This picture might be part of a transition period or indicating that polities are not being able to cope with some of the new challenges. It is why we need to think about the future of politics and how these trends will shape global governance in the next 10 to 20 years. Are political systems ready to govern a digital economy? How should political leaders evolve to address radical changes in an automated world? What will the consequences be for global governance and for the role of G20? This paper analyzes current global trends in domestic politics and the prospective scenarios on the future of politics. To do so, the paper presents a brief description on three forces we know will forge the future: technological breakthroughs, demographic changes and shifts in global economic power. Later, it turns to the uncertainty of the future. We live in nation states, so we first attempt to devise how these forces will shape domestic politics. We then look at global governance and the way these trends will impact upon it. The final stop of this journey is an analysis of the implications of these scenarios for the role of the G20.
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, Governance, Democracy, and Geopolitics
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Positive Peace Report 2020: Analysing the factors that sustain peace

Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace (IEP)
Abstract:
Peace is the prerequisite for the survival of humanity in the 21st century. Without peace, it will not be possible to achieve the levels of trust, cooperation and inclusiveness necessary to solve these challenges, let alone empower international institutions and organisations necessary to address them. In the past, peace may have been the domain of the altruistic but in the current century it is clearly in everyone’s self-interest. Without an understanding of the factors that create and sustain peaceful societies, it will not be possible to develop the programmes, create the policies or understand the resources required to build peaceful and resilient societies. Positive Peace provides a framework to understand and address the many complex challenges the world faces. Positive Peace is transformational in that it is a cross-cutting facilitator of progress, making it easier for businesses to sell, entrepreneurs and scientists to innovate, individuals to produce and governments to effectively regulate. In addition to the absence of violence, Positive Peace is also associated with many other social characteristics that are considered desirable, including stronger economic outcomes, higher resilience, better measures of wellbeing, higher levels of inclusiveness and more sustainable environmental performance.
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, Peace Studies, Peacekeeping, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus