Search

Begin New Search Topic Education Political Geography Europe Content Type Special Report Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 25 Years

1. United Kingdom Engagement with North Korea

Author:
Alastair Morgan
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
As one of the Allied Powers, The United Kingdom was involved in Post-World War II planning for the Korean peninsula, including the November 1943 Cairo Conference declaration that “… in due course, Korea shall become free and independent.” However, US President Roosevelt’s proposal at the February 1945 Yalta Conference did not establish a formal role for the UK in the trusteeship of Korea. Subsequently, the United States and the Soviet Union agreed to divide the peninsula at the 38th parallel in August 1945, and direct British involvement in the peninsula was limited prior to the Korean War. The United Kingdom’s Korean War contribution to the United Nations Command was second only to the United States, with significant deployments of maritime and air assets in addition to the provision of ground troops. Almost 60,000 British troops saw action, with nearly 5,000 killed, wounded, missing in action, or taken prisoner. Following the armistice, the United Kingdom has continued to send representation to the United Nations Command. The armistice agreement includes an obligation on so-called “Sending States” to respond to renewed hostility. Although there is no automatic UK commitment to send forces, the armistice agreement remains a consideration in engagement with North Korea.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Economics, Education, Politics, and Strategic Engagement
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, and North Korea

2. North Korea-Germany Relations: An Ambassador's Perspective of Diplomacy with Pyongyang

Author:
Armin Schäfer
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Germany established diplomatic relations with North Korea, also known as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), in 2001 at the request of the South Korean government, which hoped that Germany and the European Union (EU) would play a more active role in supporting the “Sunshine Policy.” Since then, Germany, together with the other EU states, has sought to moderate North Korea through a “Policy of Critical Engagement” to convince it of the benefits of international cooperation, respect for the rule of law, and improving the political and economic situation of its people. In doing so, Germany could build on the long relationship between North Korea and the former East Germany. “Critical engagement” means being willing to talk and get involved, but without holding back on criticism—and, if need be, imposing sanctions. It also implies that comprehensive engagement is not (yet) possible because of the circumstances. There is ample cause for a constrained approach from North Korea’s aggressive foreign policy and systematic human rights violations to the absence of suitable economic and fiscal conditions for business and development cooperation. Moreover, the lack of will on the part of considerable segments of the North Korean regime to engage with other countries also hampers broader engagement.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, Education, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, North Korea, and Germany

3. Policy landscape 2023

Author:
Ben Zaranko, Jonathan Portes, Mike Brewer, Paul Cheshire, and Carole Willis
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
What are the public policy challenges confronting the UK? What plans do the parties have for addressing them? To what extent are these plans fit for purpose? As Parliament returns from its summer recess, Full Fact and UK in a Changing Europe have partnered to produce a series of evidence led, research-based assessments of the key issues that politicians will confront. To do this, we brought together a group of leading experts from respected institutions including the Health Foundation, the Institute for Fiscal Studies, and the Royal United Services Institute. We asked each of them to consider, based on the findings of their own research, the challenges the country faces in their area of expertise, the immediate and longer-term issues politicians will need to address, and the potential implications of any choices they might make. We selected the issues based on the Ipsos issues index, and added security, defence and foreign affairs, which did not figure amongst the public’s priorities in July of this year. The intention of the collection is to inform and not persuade. Each article in this collection is the responsibility of its author.
Topic:
Climate Change, Education, Health, Politics, European Union, Economy, Brexit, Economic Growth, Public Policy, Fiscal Policy, Housing, and Standard of Living
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

4. Different Choices, Divergent Paths: Poland and Ukraine

Author:
Thorvaldur Gylfason, Eduard Hochreiter, and Tadeusz Kowalski
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
We compare the economic growth trajectories of Poland and Ukraine since 1990 to try to understand the extent to which the observed growth differentials can be traced to increased efficiency in the use of capital and other factors (intensive growth), rather than to simple accumulation of capital (extensive growth). We stress the role of qualitative factors such as education, governance and institutions. We ask whether the EU perspective and NATO membership played a role. We discuss the closely related histories of the two countries and note the stark differences between them, including their different approaches to the EU vs Russia, full vs incomplete transition to a market economy, and democracy vs anocracy, as well as different initial conditions. We compare key determinants of growth and growth trajectories, using economic as well as social indicators, and trying to disentangle efficiency and accumulation and combine path dependence and the role and scope of creative destruction. While Poland had the shortest and mildest transformation recession among CEE countries, Ukraine has been stagnant, or in decline, since 1990. The statistics we report and the stories we tell suggest that both countries have a complex relationship with democracy and that the nearly threefold difference in per capita GDP at PPP in 2021 in Poland’s favour, with the ratio of investment to GDP similar in both countries, can most plausibly be traced to: (a) Poland’s more extensive and diversified exports, and fewer restrictions on trade, in addition to more comprehensive and quicker restructuring of the national economy inspired by the EU perspective; (b) Poland’s more extensive and better-quality education; (c) Poland’s greater democracy and longer experience of democracy, lower levels of corruption, better governance, and freer press; (d) Poland’s smaller agricultural sector and greater emphasis on manufacturing; and (e) Poland’s lower inflation and higher level of financial development. Furthermore, Poland built market-friendly institutions to EU specifications and joined NATO. Against all this, Ukraine had more economic equality and lower unemployment as well as, from the early 1990s, a lower initial level of income per person, but was hampered by political divisions, path-dependent corruption and poor governance. During the global Covid-19 pandemic, Ukraine apparently suffered fewer deaths than Poland, despite fewer vaccinations.
Topic:
Economics, Education, Governance, Reform, European Union, Economic Growth, Inflation, Exports, Transition, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Poland

5. The COVID-19 Catalyst: Learning from Pandemic-Driven Innovations in Immigrant Integration Policy

Author:
Jasmijn Slootjes
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Despite talk of COVID-19 as a “great equalizer,” the pandemic and its economic fallout have hit certain segments of European and North American societies particularly hard. Among them are immigrants and refugees, and especially groups with distinct vulnerabilities, such as refugee children, irregular migrants, and migrant women. Without swift government intervention, the twin public-health and economic crises risk jeopardizing immigrant integration and creating durable rifts in diverse societies. Yet precisely at a time when bold and agile policy responses are needed, the pandemic has disrupted governments’ usual ways of working. When lockdown and social-distancing measures were introduced in 2020, many in-person integration services were suspended, and both these programs and the day-to-day work of governments and civil-society organizations shifted online. This opened new opportunities but also hindered the engagement of migrants, policymakers, and other stakeholders with limited digital access or literacy. This report examines how governments’ immigrant integration strategies, partnerships, and policy priorities have changed in the two years since the pandemic began. It explores how this period of forced adaption has worked as a catalyst for innovation at the local, national, and (in Europe) EU level, drawing on interviews with senior policymakers and other experts in North America and Europe. The report then distills recommendations on how to leverage these innovations to durably improve the governance of immigrant integration.
Topic:
Education, Employment, Innovation, COVID-19, and Immigration Policy
Political Geography:
Europe and North America

6. Taking the Long View: Options for Inclusive Post-Pandemic Labor Markets

Author:
Liam Patuzzi
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in harsh effects across European economies, and uncertainty persists even as vaccination campaigns have picked up speed. EU governments’ prompt investments in historically large job retention measures have temporarily cushioned the pandemic’s blow to labor markets, but this also means that the full impact is yet to be felt. What is clear, however, is that the crisis has exacerbated the labor market challenges some immigrant groups, such as recently arrived refugees and migrant women, were facing even before the pandemic began. Among the contributing factors are immigrants’ overrepresentation in hard-hit sectors, precarious work arrangements (such as part-time contracts and gig work), difficulties accessing social benefits, and some countries’ temporary suspension of integration supports. This MPI Europe report explores how the pandemic has affected immigrant workers thus far and how labor market trends such as automation, remote work, and the growth of the platform economy may affect migrant integration as European economies begin to recover. It also presents policy ideas and recommendations for crafting inclusive pandemic recovery strategies.
Topic:
Education, Employment, Refugees, Economy, Immigrants, COVID-19, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
Europe

7. "Diversifying" Social Investment: European Welfare States and Immigrant Integration in the Wake of the COVID-19 Crisis

Author:
Anton Hemerijck and Liam Patuzzi
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Across Europe, the COVID-19 pandemic has strengthened awareness of the importance of robust, well-functioning welfare states in helping individuals, families, and communities weather threats to their lives and livelihoods. Initial EU and Member State responses to the pandemic and its economic fallout were much more vigorous than responses to other recent economic shocks, such as the Great Recession and the European debt crisis. Even so, European societies will likely have to contend with long-term social and economic impacts, which in many cases are exacerbating existing inequalities. The shift in the structure and goals of welfare spending since the start of the pandemic can be understood through the prism of “social investment.” In recent decades, European welfare states have moved away from a predominantly reactive focus on financial safety nets that protect individuals during periods of unemployment and illness, and toward investing in people’s human capital and employability to help them navigate life transitions and drive growth in advanced knowledge economies. Looking ahead, the success of social-investment policies will depend on their ability to account for immigration and diversity, increasingly prominent features of European societies that are central to understanding the nature and development of socioeconomic inequalities. This report explores whether the social-investment approach to welfare states could serve as a tool for post-pandemic recovery—particularly in diverse, immigrant-receiving societies. It examines how European welfare systems fared and adapted during the Great Recession, how social investment seeks to balance social and economic goals, and how lessons from recent immigrant integration policy developments could help improve the reach, accessibility, and relevance of social-investment initiatives.
Topic:
Education, Health, Children, Employment, Family, Welfare, Integration, COVID-19, and Workforce
Political Geography:
Europe