Search

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

201. The geopolitics of digital financial technologies: A chance for Europe?

Author:
Brigitte Dekker, Arief Hühn, Pim Korsten, and Maaike Okano-Heijmans
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Geopolitical tensions are permeating the digital domain. During the 1990s, the emergence of the internet still involved optimism and high hopes for digital technology as a force for openness, connectedness and freedom for all. Yet contrary to these promises, a trend of centralization, is prevalent in the digital economy. This trend of centralization, with the subsequent problems of gatekeeping, ecosystem lock-in, disproportional rent-seeking and monopolists that set market rules, is now also evident in the financial industry. Whereas smaller financial technology (fintech) companies, including many European firms, revolutionized the financial sector in the 2000s – disrupting traditional banks and their vested interests – we now witness a concentration of power and data in this sector, either in incumbent firms or within Big Tech companies. In response, governments in China, the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) are devising regulations, while at the same time technology innovators are building a radically new infrastructure to underpin our financial sector: Decentralized Finance (DeFi). The geopolitical implications of this disruptive transformation of the financial sector – through both fintech and DeFi – require forward-looking government responses that protect and promote European interests in the long term. This Clingendael Report first reflects on these trends of centralization in digital finance and decentralization in ‘traditional finance’. The paper examines the relationship between geopolitics and finance and looks at the position of the EU and its member states. The analysis considers the medium to longer-term implications in the following three domains: economic competitiveness and innovation; financial–economic and social stability; and inclusivity and equality. Data governance, data protection and data portability between financial services are key concepts in each of these areas. Building on these insights, the report argues for a push towards greater awareness among European policymakers on the potentials of DeFi to counter Big Tech’s rising influence in the European financial system with a decentralized, human-centred and value-based system. At the same time, the regulatory and security risks of DeFi – and the trend of decentralization in general – must be addressed. The report also highlights the need to help people to develop digital skills and become responsible and resilient digital citizens, and calls for enhanced dialogues with officials and technology company executives in like-minded countries on current developments. New approaches, such as multi-stakeholder consultations and increased rapprochement with the open-source and crypto-communities, are needed to facilitate knowledge exchange and best practices that will improve (regulatory) responses.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Geopolitics, Internet, and Digital Finance
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

202. Growing stronger together: Towards an EU–ASEAN digital partnership?

Author:
Maaike Okano-Heijmans and Brigitte Dekker
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
In December 2021, the EU and Singapore launched talks towards a digital partnership agreement that could prove a building block for broader EU–ASEAN cooperation. This Report assesses the strategic value of increased cooperation in the field of digital connectivity, also acknowledged in the EU’s Indo-Pacific strategy of September 2021, and considers the practical challenges and opportunities of stronger ties between the two blocs and their member states in this increasingly important realm. The authors argue that three domains could form the basis of a future, shared, EU–ASEAN approach to digital connectivity: (1) digital infrastructure; (2) data governance and digital trade regulation; and (3) the digital economy and financial technologies (fintech). A bloc-to-bloc approach should run in parallel with strengthened ties by the EU and its member states with specific ASEAN member states. Together, these building blocks will serve EU and ASEAN long-term interests, promoting economic competitiveness and inclusive growth, as well as openness, transparency and freedom in the digital realm.
Topic:
European Union, Partnerships, ASEAN, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, and Singapore

203. A new formula for collaboration: Turkey, the EU & North Africa

Author:
Nienke van Heukelingen
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Over recent years, relations between Turkey and the European Union (EU) have been difficult and driven more by crisis management rather than equal partnership. Yet, despite this downward spiral, both blocs remain key partners on domains such as trade, migration and counterterrorism and repeatedly express their interest in developing a more cooperative and constructive relationship. This report is a product of the ‘Searching for a New Formula for collaboration between Turkey and the EU in/with North Africa’ project, which investigated the extent to which Turkey and the EU could collaborate in and with North Africa, more specifically, Morocco, Egypt and Algeria. North Africa was chosen because it offers an underexplored area of research for Turkey-EU relations; Morocco, Egypt and Algeria were selected for specific study as they are the countries with which both Turkey and the EU have the highest trade volumes in the region. Moreover, there are currently no joint projects between Turkey and the EU in Morocco, Algeria or Egypt, although the region is an area of strategic importance for both Turkey and the EU. The recent war in Ukraine has also increased the value of North Africa as a provider of agricultural products and gas for the region. Libya and Tunisia were excluded from the research to narrow the scope of the project. To avoid the traps of reproducing ‘neo-colonial’ or ‘neo-Ottoman’ discourses and of following a top-down approach, this study used action research as a democratic, participatory and collaborative research methodology. It engaged diverse participants from Turkey, the EU and North Africa in semi-structured in-depth interviews, conferences and a survey. Through a cyclical process, the study devised a tripartite collaborative model and concrete project ideas under five major policy options in which cooperation between Turkey, the EU, Morocco, Algeria and Egypt could be actionable. This report gives a detailed account of the abovementioned tripartite collaborative model and the subsequent project ideas which were designed to be mutually beneficial for all three blocs –Turkey, the EU and North Africa. It should, nevertheless, be mentioned that current geopolitical uncertainties in the wider region could challenge the implementation of these projects. The civil war in Libya, the political tension between Turkey and Egypt or Morocco and Algeria, and the influence of China and Russia in the region could pose potential risks for collaboration. However, we maintain that such uncertainties make it even more timely to seek opportunities for a future collaborative environment in the Mediterranean as, ‘if the Mediterranean is weak, all Mediterranean countries are weak’.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Migration, European Union, Crisis Management, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and North Africa

204. Investors beware: Europe’s top firms are highly exposed to China

Author:
Ties Dams and Xiaoxue Martin
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Europe’s top firms are highly exposed to China, and therefore to China-related geopolitical risk. This risk is only set to increase in the coming years, as geopolitical tensions between China, the US and the EU are not expected to decrease. Moreover, case studies of LVMH, HSBC, ASML and BMW show that some of Europe’s biggest listed firms could and should offer investors more transparency on their risk-management strategies. Intelligence on China and geopolitical risk exposure is key for investors, and investors that get ahead of the curve may have the edge in the long term. This report is aimed at investors in Europe’s biggest listed firms. It argues that investors have a growing need for transparency amongst European biggest companies with regard to their strategies in dealing with China-related geopolitical risk. Even investors without direct interests in China are or will be affected by China-related geopolitical risk due to the various forms of exposure of companies in the European home market. This means that investors may be increasingly exposed to the risks linked to great power competition, without having the knowledge necessary to anticipate geopolitical changes. As geopolitical tensions between China, the US and the EU are not expected to decrease, investors would be wise to seek greater transparency about European companies’ exposure to the Chinese market – and indeed get ahead of the curve and gain a competitive advantage by investing in those firms that have forward-looking geopolitical strategies in place. This report aims to put this point on investors’ strategic agenda by making the following three points: Europe’s top firms are highly exposed to China. China-related geopolitical risk is spreading. Case studies suggest that Europe’s top firms may not be sufficiently transparent about geopolitical risk management.
Topic:
Geopolitics, Business, Investment, and Risk
Political Geography:
China and Europe

205. The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming? Russia’s growing presence in Africa and its implication for European policy

Author:
Guido Lanfranchi and Kars de Bruijne
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
The growth of Russia’s presence across Africa over the last decade has generated significant international concern, further exacerbated after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. Russia’s engagement can affect the interests and policies of the European Union (EU) and its member states (MS) in Africa. How should European policymakers understand these developments and respond to them? To answer this question, this report looks at Russia’s engagement in Africa, reaching three main conclusions. First, Moscow’s engagement with Africa has so far remained limited as compared to that of other global players, particularly in the economic domain. The current level of (media) attention devoted to Russia’s role in Africa is thus not supported by sufficient evidence of its actual engagement in the continent. At the same time, however, the growth of Russia’s presence is a real trend. Second, Russian actors are guided by a rather loose strategy when it comes to Africa. The Russian state has some interests that act as a broad framework. However, the actual engagement is carried out not only by state actors, but also by state-backed conglomerates and politically connected private businesses. These latter actors have their own specific interests, which are not always fully aligned with those of the Russian state. While state actors are often driven by geopolitical considerations, Russian companies are more interested in economic opportunities. Third, Russia’s engagement in African countries is significantly shaped by the different national contexts and by the interests of African governments. For instance, in a strong state like Ethiopia, Russia’s engagement takes place exclusively at the governmental level. By contrast, in Sudan and Mali (contexts with weaker state structures), other Russian actors like PMCs and private businesses are involved. Yet, in all three cases, Moscow’s presence tends to grow when relations between African governments and their international partners (especially in the West) deteriorate, often in the wake of authoritarian turns. This shows the opportunistic nature of Russia’s engagement, as well as the complex trade-offs faced by EU/MS governments when engaging with African governments. These findings have significant consequences for the policy response of the EU and its member states. This report suggests that: (i) Rather than trying to respond reactively to Russia’s presence, EU/MS should focus on strengthening their own relations with relevant African partners. Addressing some of the political and economic imbalances in the Europe-Africa partnership may be an effective way to strengthen such relations, and by doing so to reduce the chances of an increase in Russia’s influence. (ii) In countries where this preventive strategy is difficult to implement (e.g. when facing authoritarian governments), decisions on whether/how to engage should go beyond debates about Russia’s (potential) presence, and be based instead on a comprehensive understanding of EU/MS interests and norms. Partnerships with non-governmental actors (e.g. the private sector, traditional authorities) may allow EU/MS governments to remain engaged despite souring ties with the government. (iii) In countries where Russia’s presence is already established, evidence-based and context-specific assessments of this presence should inform the EU/MS policy response. This can allow EU/MS governments to avoid overreacting to Russia’s influence, while also not underestimating its dangers. (iv) To pursue their interests in an increasingly multipolar world, EU/MS governments should try to strengthen their leverage vis-à-vis Russia (as well as other actors). To do so, EU/MS policymakers should leverage more strategically the engagement of European businesses across Africa.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, European Union, and Engagement
Political Geography:
Africa, Russia, and Europe

206. NATO’s 2030 Reflection Process and the New Strategic Concept: Implications for the Security in Northern Europe

Author:
Robin Allers, Rachel Lutz Ellehuus, Claudia Major, Christian Mölling, Paul O'Neill, and Johannes Gullestad Rø
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The NATO 2030 reflection process was sparked by worries that the Alliance might falter as a forum for political consultation. Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom, and the United States all have a shared interest in ensuring NATO's coherence, improving the credibility of its deterrent, and strengthening its capacity to act. This report from the Security in Northern Europe (SNE) project presents contemporary views on NATO's Strategic Concept 2030 from Berlin, London, Oslo, and Washington D.C.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Europe

207. Risky Thinking: How Scenarios Can Help the EU Bounce Back from Strategic Shock

Author:
Roderick Parkes and Mark McQuay
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Since coming to power in December, the Scholz government has blundered into a series of foreseeable crises: medical shortages; reliance on Russia for gas; Ukraine’s need for robust support. France’s President Macron anticipated all three crises, giving weight to his calls for Europeans to pursue autonomy and reduce dependence on the outside world. Policy makers are now demanding scenario exercises that illustrate the obvious dangers of interdependency to back up their policy shift.
Topic:
European Union, Crisis Management, Risk, and European Commission
Political Geography:
Europe

208. The Geopolitics of Digital Technology Innovation: Assessing Strengths and Challenges of Germany’s Innovation Ecosystem

Author:
Tyson Barker and David Hagebölling
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
The COVID-era public and private investment influx into Germany’s digital technology R&D is reversing amid inflation, fiscal consolidation, and geopolitical pressures coming from the Zeitenwende. Germany’s future in an EU that is among the top-tier technology powers requires a profound and rapid transition of the country’s R&D strengths into data-intensive, systems-centric areas of IoT and deep technology that are linked to the domestic manufacturing base. New policy approaches in three areas – money, markets, and minds – are needed. New technologies such as robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), advanced material science, biotech, and quantum computing tend to have broad general-purpose applications. But uncoordinated funding vehicles, universities’ civil clauses, and restrictive visa and onboarding guidelines for skilled foreign workers slow innovation in these sectors and hamper German geo-technological competitiveness. In the mid-term, Germany could look at a scheme to bundle the Future Fund together with new institutional investment in a sort of embryonic German Sovereign Wealth Fund, with a proportion of funding specifically geared toward strategically important VC endeavors.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Geopolitics, Innovation, and Digitization
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

209. NATO's Asia-Pacific Partners & Their Ukraine Response: Why Global Partnerships Matter for America

Author:
Kimery Lynch
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Kimery Lynch, a Projects Coordinator at the East-West Center in Washington, explains how NATO has been stepping up engagement with its four “Asia-Pacific partners” (Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand) in the wake of Russia’s war on Ukraine.
Topic:
NATO, Partnerships, Engagement, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Japan, Europe, Ukraine, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Asia-Pacific, and United States of America

210. Functional Specialisation in EU Value Chains: Methods for Identifying EU Countries’ Roles in International Production Networks

Author:
Aleksandra Kordalska, Magdalena Olczyk, Roman Stöllinger, and Zuzana Zavarská
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
Geographically dispersed production networks have allowed countries to specialise in different functions of the value chain. By making use of two methodologies for quantifying the magnitude of functional specialisation – one based on trade flows and one based on FDI flows – detailed profiles of the functional specialisations of EU member states are identified. The analyses are conducted at the country, industry and regional level. In line with the existing literature, they reveal that EU-CEE countries are predominantly specialised in the fabrication stage, that is, they serve as ‘factory economies’, while the Western EU countries are mainly performing knowledge-intensive pre-fabrication activities – a characteristic of ‘headquarter economies’. This dualism within the EU is confirmed by a cluster analysis. While functional specialisation patterns tend to be persistent, especially in the fabrication stage, there are also some signs of functional diversification in EU-CEE countries in more recent years. Still, these functional changes remain limited to a few industries. The dichotomy of factory and headquarter economies is also clearly discernible at the regional level. However, the fact that in most EU countries – mainly in the capital regions – there are some headquarter-type regions implies that a complete functional ‘lock-in’ in fabrication is less likely than suggested by the country-level patterns. Hence, while the results point towards major difficulties of functional diversification beyond the fabrication stage in the EU-CEE countries and regions, there are also several promising elements and trends discernible, in particular at the industry and the regional level.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, European Union, Economy, Value Chains, Specialization, and Competition
Political Geography:
Europe