Number of results to display per page
Search Results
15852. Evaluating the Trump Administration’s Approach to Sanctions: Venezuela
- Author:
- Richard Nephew
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Since taking power in January 2017, the Trump administration has overseen a dramatic escalation of sanctions[1] to pressure and punish US adversaries, including high-profile cases against Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela. Against this background, the Center on Global Energy Policy is publishing a short series of critiques of the Trump administration’s sanctions in the four cases mentioned. The series utilizes findings from the author’s book The Art of Sanctions, which recommends policy makers evaluate their sanctions decisions regularly to assess whether they are using sanctions effectively. It counsels that policy makers should have alternative strategies under development for use if they determine sanctions have or will likely fail to achieve their objectives. Further, the author enjoins those intent on using sanctions to recall that, like all foreign policy instruments, sanctions are only as good as the underlying strategy being pursued. This commentary, the fourth and last in the series, examines the effectiveness of the sanctions put in place against Venezuela. It assesses the sanctions approach within the parameters of the framework outlined in The Art of Sanctions and concludes with recommendations for the Trump administration. The Trump administration began with a conundrum: how to exert leverage on a country that is not only hostile to the United States but also an economic mess. Diplomatic engagement appeared an implausible path toward resolving US concerns with the country—not least of which centered on its potential to be disruptive to the region as a whole—but these concerns did not reach the level that would merit the use of military force. Such situations are usually tailor-made for the application of sanctions pressure, but, in Venezuela’s case, the country was already suffering under considerable economic strain that was entirely self-administered. Sensibly, the Trump administration declined to undertake major new sanctions initiatives for over a year. But upon doing so, the administration found itself in a wholly new and arguably more difficult situation: imposing sanctions on a country in the midst of a contested political transition. To date, the sanctions approach selected has been largely reasonable in this context, but impatience over the slow pace of the aforementioned transition could prompt error, especially if the administration loses sight of the desired end goal and begins to see sanctions pressure as an end unto itself.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- South America, Venezuela, North America, and United States of America
15853. The Greenest Stimulus Is One that Delivers Rapid Economic Recovery
- Author:
- Noah Kaufman
- Publication Date:
- 06-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- As governments plot their responses to the COVID crisis, it’s difficult to find an influential voice who is not calling for economic stimulus legislation that simultaneously aims to achieve climate change goals.[1] As International Monetary Fund chief Kristalina Georgieva put it: “We are about to deploy enormous, gigantic fiscal stimulus and we can do it in a way that we tackle both crises at the same time.”[2] After all, governments will spend trillions of dollars to put people back to work. This could be a once-in-a-generation opportunity to shape massive government expenditures in a lower-carbon direction. Europe appears poised to take this advice, with the European Commission crafting a “Green Deal” at the center of a recovery package.[3] Many European countries have strong climate policy frameworks in place, including emissions regulations and net zero targets. In these countries, clean energy investments within economic stimulus packages can combine with these existing policy frameworks to enable even faster and cheaper decarbonization.[4] Here in the United States, the situation is starkly different. Expectations for climate progress from economic stimulus should be low, for two (related) reasons. First, the United States has no national climate plan in place, and the ability of clean energy spending to deliver emissions reductions without accompanying emissions regulations is very limited. Second, political opposition can prevent or severely weaken climate measures in economic stimulus for the foreseeable future. The climate measures with a plausible chance of inclusion in economic stimulus will, at best, enable the United States to continue muddling along on an incremental decarbonization pathway while temperatures rise to increasingly dangerous levels.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Green Technology, Recovery, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15854. Is China Still a Developing Country? And Why It Matters for Energy and Climate
- Author:
- Philippe Benoit and Kevin Tu
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- China’s dramatic economic growth in the 21st century has made it not only the second largest economy in the world but also a powerhouse in the global energy system. Now, as the top energy consumer and the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, China is being closely watched and judged as its impact on energy markets and climate grows more profound. Looking forward, many issues are expected to shape the evolution of China’s energy sector, not least of which is its development status. While China’s economic might makes it a superpower alongside the United States, it still faces many of the major challenges of a typical developing country, such as widespread energy poverty, including 400 million people without access to clean cooking, significant air pollution, and dependence on increasing energy use to fuel future economic growth. Its modest income per capita qualifies it as a middle-income developing country. Evaluating China’s development status is not just an academic exercise. How China views itself and its challenges and how the international community classifies it carry real-world consequences that can significantly impact how the country manages its energy needs going forward, what fuels it uses, how it interacts with energy and other partners, and the level of its contributions and commitment to climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts worldwide. Understanding the nature and implications of China’s development situation can help in designing energy policies and fostering an international framework that better promote sustainable growth both within the country and globally. This paper examines how the usual criteria employed by international organizations to determine a country’s development standing have become increasingly difficult to apply to China, given the dramatic changes it has undergone over the past several decades, notably from an energy perspective. The paper finds that China combines significant characteristics of both developing and developed countries and examines the energy and environmental implications of this hybrid status.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Development, Energy Policy, and Environment
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
15855. Strengthening Nuclear Energy Cooperation between the United States and Its Allies
- Author:
- Matt Bowen
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Nuclear energy cooperation between the United States and its allies has been important for over a half century. Bilateral cooperation agreements with key countries date back to the 1950s, and the United States played a principal role in the development of several allied nuclear energy programs. Today, the international nuclear energy marketplace has changed, and the supply chain is globalized—the US program, for example, depends on working with allies for major safety-related components. However, limitations imposed by legacy US statutes and other obstacles are hampering greater collaboration in areas that would enhance the country’s nuclear program today. Developing advanced reactors to produce dispatchable zero-carbon electricity and heat as part of global efforts to address climate change would be aided by greater cooperation and utilization of resources and financing across countries. Deeper cooperation with like-minded allies would also allow the United States to better compete against other supplier countries that have different commercial and geopolitical objectives. If the challenges facing the US nuclear program are not overcome, the country risks further ceding its role as a leading nuclear technology exporter to China and Russia. Already China and Russia are growing their domestic nuclear energy programs and offering attractive financing to prospective customers of this technology around the world. These nuclear competitors may place differing priorities on areas such as nonproliferation, and therefore maintaining a US role in the nuclear supplier regime is connected with national security considerations. This paper, part of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University’s nuclear power program, examines part of what may be required for the United States to regain momentum in the nuclear power industry after an erosion of domestic capabilities stemming from a long hiatus in new reactor orders. The paper discusses the historical importance of nuclear cooperation between the United States and allies, some of the challenges that the US and some allied nuclear energy programs are facing, and how cooperation could be reinvigorated to the benefit of the United States and its allies.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Energy Policy, International Cooperation, and Nuclear Energy
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and United States of America
15856. From Climate Change Awareness to Climate Crisis Action
- Author:
- Jan Eichhorn, Luuk Molthof, and Sascha Nicke
- Publication Date:
- 11-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- This report charts attitudes on the existence, causes, and impact of climate change in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden, Poland, Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It also examines public attitudes to a series of policies that the EU and national governments could harness to reduce the damage inflicted by human-made emissions. Although a clear majority of European and United States respondents are aware that the climate is warming, and that it is likely to have negative impacts for humankind, this report finds there is confusion about the scientific consensus on climate change. This, the report argues, has created a gap between public awareness and climate science, leaving the public underestimating the urgency of the crisis, and failing to appreciate the scale of the action required.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Environment, Science and Technology, Fossil Fuels, Carbon Emissions, and Ecology
- Political Geography:
- Europe
15857. Are Agri-Food Workers Only Exploited in Southern Europe?
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- In recent years, several studies have reported on the exploitation endured by migrant workers in Southern European Union member states—especially in sectors such as agriculture and food production. However, there has been much less focus on the North. New research now shows that agri-food workers in Northern Europe also face poor and even abusive conditions. In this light, Are Agri-Food Workers Only Exploited in Southern Europe? focuses on production in Germany, Netherlands, and Sweden. These three EU member states have stronger social protections than Italy, Spain or Greece—yet the dynamics driving wage compression and the violation of workers’ rights are like those in Southern Europe. This publication provides recommendations on how the EU and national governments can act to make Europe’s agri-food system more sustainable, benefiting farmers, consumers, workers, and the environment.
- Topic:
- Agriculture, Environment, Human Rights, Labor Issues, Sustainability, Farming, Exploitation, and Consumerism
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Northern Europe, and Southern Europe
15858. Roma in the COVID-19 Crisis
- Author:
- Neda Korunovska and Zeljko Jovanovic
- Publication Date:
- 04-2020
- Content Type:
- Case Study
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- Roma communities in Europe face a much higher risk of death from COVID-19, as their situation, already marked by extreme racism and poverty, has been worsening in the last decade. However, the European Union member states covered in this policy brief—Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovakia, and Spain—have not responded with proportionate support. This brief argues that the COVID-19 crisis and the EU’s recovery plan in response both present an opportunity to improve the conditions of Europe’s Roma—not only in terms of rights, obligations, needs, but in the interests of sound political and economic decision-making across the region.
- Topic:
- Economics, Health, Human Rights, Health Care Policy, Social Policy, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Spain, Italy, and Slovakia
15859. Do We Need an EU Ethical Food Label?
- Author:
- Giorgia Ceccarelli and Daniele Fattibene
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- Eradicating the exploitation of agri-food workers, promoting fairer food supply chains, and offering consumers effective tools to make truly informed food choices remain huge challenges in Europe. This report highlights the limitations of relying solely on food labelling schemes to meet these goals, and finds that voluntary certification schemes do not adequately enforce regulations or protect human rights. The report also argues, however, that the EU can use a number of tools to foster more just food supply chains, with ethical labels playing a role in that process as part of a “smart mix” of measures. The case studies in this report show that it is possible to have increased transparency in food labelling and supply chains, as well as better protections of workers in Europe and throughout the world. Additionally, the report explains how the EU can play an important role in providing food businesses with clear regulatory frameworks to ensure their operations do not harm workers or the environment.
- Topic:
- Environment, Health, Human Rights, Labor Issues, Food, Regulation, and Business
- Political Geography:
- Europe
15860. Working Together to Address Health Workforce Mobility in Europe
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- The free movement of people is a cornerstone of an open and integrated Europe. Yet the labor migration of Europeans from lower-income countries in southern and eastern Europe to higher-income countries in northern and western Europe has had significant impact on the workforce—including the loss of skilled health professionals in their most productive years. Indeed, since 1989, hundreds of thousands of European health professionals have left their countries of origin for more promising opportunities in the west and north. Denied opportunities for decent work at home, and recruited by countries facing their own labor shortages, their mobility is a byproduct of a failure throughout Europe to develop health workforces in an evidence-based and strategic way. Ultimately, this failure threatens the human right to health. This brief offers policymakers six key insights, drawn from a literature review and interviews with European experts, on the migration and mobility of health professionals. These insights are offered within a framework that prioritizes human rights, gender equality, and worker solidarity.
- Topic:
- Migration, Labor Issues, Health Care Policy, European Union, Economic Mobility, and Migrant Workers
- Political Geography:
- Europe
15861. German Priorities for Africa during Its Presidency of the EU Council
- Author:
- Bram Dijkstra and Marta Martinelli
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- 2020 is a pivotal year for EU-Africa relations. Germany’s presidency of the EU Council provides an opportunity to address structural challenges—such as health care infrastructure, food provision, and managing the refugee and migration crises—revealed by the current COVID-19 crisis. The policy brief details Germany’s ambitions to foster a new partnership with Africa and offers recommendations in three priority areas: health care policy, economic development, and democratic governance.
- Topic:
- Agriculture, Diplomacy, Migration, Food, Health Care Policy, Refugees, Refugee Crisis, and Economic Development
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Germany
15862. The Modern Agreement of Amity and Commerce: Toward a New Model for Trade Agreements
- Author:
- Beth Baltzan
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Open Society Foundations
- Abstract:
- Around the world, the process of economic globalization is under fire for serving the needs of corporate elites rather than ordinary citizens. But it is important to recall that trade does not have to aggravate inequality. The rules of globalization matter. If we have better rules for trade, trade will produce better results. In this paper, Beth Baltzan, a trade lawyer with extensive experience in government, proposes a new paradigm for a more equitable trading regime—outlining the key elements of an agreement with the overarching purpose of fostering positive relations between like-minded parties.
- Topic:
- Globalization, Economic Inequality, Trade, and Trade Policy
- Political Geography:
- Global
15863. It’s Time to Put Climate Action at the Center of U.S. Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Jason Bordoff
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- In the U.S. Democratic Party, perhaps no issue has risen more in prominence during this election year compared with prior ones than climate change. The number of self-identified Democrats who consider it a “major threat” is up from 6 in 10 in 2013 to almost 9 in 10 today. A slew of proposals—from the Green New Deal embraced by many progressive environmental groups to a new 538-page climate plan released by Democratic members of a special committee on the climate crisis in the U.S. House of Representatives—lay out various policies. Yet while these plans offer much to celebrate, all of them fall short by focusing on domestic actions while paying scant attention to the global nature of the crisis. Every ton of carbon dioxide contributes to climate change no matter where it is emitted, so an ambitious climate strategy cannot only be domestic—it must put the issue squarely at the center of U.S. foreign policy. Past U.S. efforts to advance global action, such as Washington’s leadership to help secure the 2015 Paris climate agreement, have been key to progress. Yet given both the urgency and global nature of climate change, the issue cannot be siloed into U.S. State Department or Energy Department offices and spheres of diplomacy. Many aspects of U.S. foreign policy will impact, and be impacted by, climate change. An effective foreign policy requires taking climate change directly into consideration—not just as a problem to resolve, but as an issue that can affect the success and failure of strategies in areas as varied as counterterrorism, migration, international economics, and maritime security. Human rights offers some important lessons. In the wake of the Vietnam War and the United States’ secret bombings of Cambodia, public concern for human rights was on the rise. Upon taking office in 1977, President Jimmy Carter declared human rights to be a “central concern” of U.S. foreign policy. In contrast to the realpolitik promoted by outgoing Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, Carter argued that protecting human rights would advance U.S. interests and was too important to be divorced from other aspects of U.S. foreign policy. Rather, human rights must be “woven into the fabric of our foreign policy,” as then Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher testified before a Senate subcommittee. Despite Carter’s mixed foreign-policy success, climate change demands a similar centrality. As the defining challenge of our time, climate change must be elevated to a foreign-policy priority and cannot be addressed with a compartmentalized approach. It is necessary, of course, to rejoin the Paris agreement, contribute to international finance efforts such as the Green Climate Fund, curb multilateral coal financing, and collaborate with other countries on clean-energy innovation. Yet all these efforts add up to an international climate strategy, not a climate-centered foreign policy. Truly making climate change a pillar of a foreign-policy strategy would have five key elements.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, International Cooperation, and Paris Agreement
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15864. Warsaw, Brussels, and Europe’s Green Deal: Challenges and Opportunities in 2020
- Author:
- Jonathan Elkind and Damian Bednarz
- Publication Date:
- 07-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Prospects for the proposed European Green Deal—a top European Union (EU) priority despite the headwinds from the global pandemic—require accommodating both the “climate ambitious” policy makers in Brussels, Berlin, and several other EU capitals and the “climate cautious” leaders in Warsaw and other Eastern European capitals. With the European Council’s announcement of an agreed package on July 21, 2020, a tricky step remains: ratification by the European Parliament and national legislatures. If lawmakers support the Council’s package, this impressive feat of deal-making will yield important outcomes
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Regional Cooperation, Science and Technology, European Union, Green Technology, and Green New Deal
- Political Geography:
- Europe
15865. Green Stimulus Proposals in the United States and China
- Author:
- David B. Sandalow and Xu Qinhua
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- On June 14, 2020 New York time and June 15, 2020 Beijing time, the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University and Center for International Energy and Environment Strategy Studies at Renmin University convened a joint Zoom workshop on green stimulus programs in the US and China. The workshop offered a chance for scholars from the two universities to explore the recent economic downturn due to the COVID-19 pandemic, stimulus measures adopted to date and green stimulus proposals in both countries. Participants also discussed other measures to promote clean energy and low-carbon development in the US and China.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Green Technology, and Paris Agreement
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
15866. Nuclear Decision-Making in Iran: Implications for US Nonproliferation Efforts
- Author:
- Ariane Tabatabai
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Assessments of foreign policy tend to fall into one of two major camps: either they ascribe to a state’s actions all of the characteristics of a unitary actor, in which there is a decision made and executed as designed; or they fixate on the minutiae of the internal politics and deal making that went into the decision, underscoring the complexity of decision-making but often losing the thread of what results. This is particularly pernicious when involving the actions of a state with opaque decision-making and where attribution of responsibility is often itself the subject of intense internal political debate and controversy, as is the case with Iran. In this paper, Ariane Tabatabai seeks to pierce the veil of Iranian nuclear decision-making to both explain how decisions are reached and identify the effects of those decisions as a matter of Iranian state policy. This is, in many ways, an essential matter for those interested in understanding how Iran will decide—and what Iran may decide—to do in response to the continued stresses being imposed upon it by US-led international sanctions, especially when previous analysis has proven to be both overly optimistic (that Iran would meekly absorb the costs of US sanctions) and, at times, overly pessimistic (that Iran would withdraw from the nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action without delay). It is necessary to understand better how Iran reaches its decisions, particularly in the nuclear sphere, to be able to more accurately predict what it may choose to do next. This has utility in a variety of lines of work and study, but perhaps no more so than in the energy industry, which is both affected by—and has the power to affect in turn—Iranian decision-making. For this reason, we commissioned this paper and commend it to you as an important source of knowledge on how Iran’s decision-making process works, especially as relates to its nuclear weapons–relevant capabilities. Though the weapons program remains dormant, the way in which Iranian officials—and Iran as that unitary actor—think about these capabilities is an essential element of the story to come.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, Military Strategy, and Nuclear Energy
- Political Geography:
- Iran and Middle East
15867. A Near-Term to Net Zero Alternative to the Social Cost of Carbon for Setting Carbon Prices
- Author:
- Noah Kaufman, Peter Marsters, Alexander R. Barron, Wojciech Krawczyk, and Haewon McJeon
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The social cost of carbon (SCC) is commonly described and used as the optimal CO2 price. However, the wide range of SCC estimates provides limited practical assistance to policymakers setting specific CO2 prices. Here we describe an alternate near-term to net zero (NT2NZ) approach, estimating CO2 prices needed in the near term for consistency with a net-zero CO2 emissions target. This approach dovetails with the emissions-target-focused approach that frames climate policy discussions around the world, avoids uncertainties in estimates of climate damages and long-term decarbonization costs, offers transparency about sensitivities and enables the consideration of CO2 prices alongside a portfolio of policies. We estimate illustrative NT2NZ CO2 prices for the United States; for a 2050 net-zero CO2 emission target, prices are US$34 to US$64 per metric ton in 2025 and US$77 to US$124 in 2030. These results are most influenced by assumptions about complementary policies and oil prices.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Natural Resources, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15868. Trends and Contradictions in China’s Renewable Energy Policy
- Author:
- Anders Hove
- Publication Date:
- 08-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- China is the world’s leader in wind and solar power, although new capacity is being added more slowly than several years ago. Meanwhile, a wave of coal power plant approvals and fewer public mentions of urban air pollution and climate change have raised questions about the future of China’s renewable power sector in the wake of Covid-19. In this commentary, Anders Hove examines China’s recent energy policy announcements and their implications for the 14th Five-Year Plan, which will set energy policy for the period from 2021–2025. He argues that the future of renewable energy deployment in China will be shaped by an ongoing contradiction within the power sector between long-term market-oriented reforms on the one hand and short-term administrative planning on the other. This contradiction is well represented in two draft laws issued in April and June 2020: the draft Energy Law and the draft Guiding Opinion on Establishing a Clean Energy Consumption Long-Term Mechanism. The former states that the country should prioritize development of renewable energy by opening the market to more players, while the latter puts grid companies, provincial officials, and incumbent generation companies in charge of all aspects of planning and target-setting. The ways in which this contradiction will be resolved are unclear. China’s central government remains focused on promoting markets in the longer term, in part based on market models that have worked in Europe and the US, so international lessons and experiences could play a role. China’s power reform could benefit from a greater focus on including consumers and other market players, and greater emphasis of long-term over short-term planning. Such a shift would help ameliorate the current trend of over-investment in unneeded and uneconomic coal capacity at the expense of renewables.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Renewable Energy, Wind Power, and Solar Power
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
15869. Fighting Against Imperialism: The Latin American Approach to International Sanctions
- Author:
- Jose Ignacio Hernandez
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The Latin American experience with international sanctions has been mostly as sanctioned states rather than targeting states. This is not merely because Latin American countries have lacked the interest in using sanctions tools but also because of more complex factors, including the historical evolution of Latin American nationhood, a set of cultural values rooted in the defense of national sovereignty, and opposition to any foreign intervention. Although those values were embraced as a result of defending the independence of Latin American nations against European dominance, the values were also applied in intraregional relations in Latin America. As a result, there is not a strong culture of international sanctions imposed by Latin American countries. With few exceptions—such as Cuba—Latin American countries tend to rely on diplomatic negotiations conducted under the nonintervention principle. The unparalleled crisis in Venezuela has produced a change in perspective. While the main actions adopted regarding this crisis were undertaken to facilitate diplomatic negotiations with the Venezuelan government, Latin America—particularly within the framework of the Organization of American States (OAS)—has started to implement international sanctions as a tool to promote a transition in Venezuelan governance. This shift has not been without controversy in Latin America. Consequently, the principle of nonintervention as relates to the use of sanctions is under stress in Latin America and merits re-examination. This paper, part of the International Security Initiative at the Center on Global Energy Policy, reviews the history of international sanctions in Latin America in the context of broader diplomatic developments.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Imperialism, Sanctions, and Negotiation
- Political Geography:
- South America, Latin America, and North America
15870. The Implications of an Iran Sanctions Snapback
- Author:
- Richard Nephew
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- For several months, it has seemed likely that the Trump administration would elect to pursue the reimposition, or snapback, of UN Security Council (UNSC) sanctions against Iran. For those less steeped in the terminology, the concept of sanctions “snapback” is one developed as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It refers to the ability of the United States and other partners to quickly reimpose the sanctions that were suspended as part of the quid pro quo that saw Iran accept significant restrictions and transparency requirements for its nuclear program. Conceptually, this was necessary because Iran had the ability to restart its nuclear program if the United States or others were seen as cheating on the deal. The United States and its partners needed some assurance that, if Iran were found to be cheating, they could react just as swiftly. On August 20, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo finally submitted the notification that, according to the US government, would trigger a 30-day timeline for the reimposition of these sanctions. In the US view there is now no stopping the return of the UNSC’s original Iran sanctions regime, though there may be some procedural wrangling over how and when the measures will be reimposed. It is not clear, however, whether this will be the case. A fair amount of analysis has gone into the fundamental question of whether the United States has the standing to trigger snapback, which is an issue I explored in 2019.[1] European, Russian, Chinese, Iranian, and other observers argue that the United States has no such standing, because, under the terms of the UN Security Council resolution that created the snapback mechanism (UNSCR 2231), it is no longer a “participant” of the JCPOA following its withdrawal in 2018. Even former National Security Advisor John Bolton—who was in large part responsible for the US withdrawal from the JCPOA—tends to agree with this reading.[2] The Trump administration obviously disagrees. It is an important question, and one that speaks to the underlying credibility and integrity of the US snapback decision as well as its results. But, ultimately, there is no way of finding a conclusive answer. International law being what it is, there are no authoritative arbiters available to determine whether the United States or its many critics are right. Snapback is happening and will have consequences, we now need to shift to considering what comes next. I see four main outcomes that are directly relevant to this decision and the future of US sanctions policy and negotiations.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, United Nations, Military Strategy, Sanctions, and JCPOA
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Middle East, North America, and United States of America
15871. Leveraging State Funds for Clean Energy: Lessons from New York State
- Author:
- Richard L. Kaufman and David B. Sandalow
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic is creating extraordinary financial challenges for state governments. Tax revenues are plummeting and social service expenses increasing, leaving budget shortfalls projected to exceed $750 billion over the next three years.[1] For state governments to continue playing important roles in promoting clean energy, they will need to adopt strategies that leverage their limited funds. This commentary proposes four principles to guide state governments in spending limited funds to promote clean energy and discusses recent programs that applied those principles in New York State. One of the authors, Richard Kauffman, played a central role in the development of those programs as New York State “Energy Czar” from 2013 to 2019 and continues to serve as Chair of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA).
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Renewable Energy, COVID-19, and Safe Energy
- Political Geography:
- New York, North America, and United States of America
15872. Energizing America
- Author:
- Varun Sivaram, Colin Cunliff, David Hart, Julio Friendmann, and David B. Sandalow
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Book
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Clean energy innovation is central to the fight against climate change. The dramatic success in lowering the costs of solar panels and wind turbines in the past decade must be replicated across a wide range of other energy technologies. Doing so will open extraordinary economic opportunities. To rise to this challenge, the United States should launch a National Energy Innovation Mission. Led by the president and authorized by Congress, this mission should harness the nation’s unmatched innovative capabilities—at research universities, federal laboratories, and private firms (both large and small), in all regions of the country—to speed the progress of clean energy technologies. To jumpstart this mission and unlock a virtuous cycle of public and private investment, the US federal government should triple its funding for energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) over the next five years.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Green Technology, Renewable Energy, Wind Power, Solar Power, and Safe Energy
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15873. Reform Is in the Pipelines: PipeChina and the Restructuring of China’s Natural Gas Market
- Author:
- Erica Downs and Sheng Yan
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Beijing launched the most ambitious reform of China’s oil and natural gas industry in more than two decades with the establishment of the China Oil & Gas Piping Network Corporation (PipeChina) last December. The company is being developed from midstream assets—pipelines, liquified natural gas (LNG) import terminals, and storage facilities—and personnel transferred from China’s national oil companies (NOCs). Beijing expects that its goals of increasing China’s domestic and imported natural gas supplies and consumption will be more effectively advanced by having China’s midstream infrastructure owned and operated by a single company that provides fair and open access to its pipelines, LNG import terminals, and storage facilities instead of by three NOCs reluctant to grant third-party access to infrastructure.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Natural Resources, Gas, and LNG
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia
15874. Net-Zero and Geospheric Return: Actions Today for 2030 and Beyond
- Author:
- Julio Friedmann, Alex Zapantis, Brad Page, Chris Consoli, Zhiyuan Fan, Ian Havercroft, Harry Liu, Emeka Richard Ochu, Nabeela Raji, Dominic Rassool, Hadia Sheerazi, and Alex Townsend
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The case for rapid and profound decarbonization has never been more obvious or more urgent, and immediate action must match growing global ambition and need. An important new component of this discussion is the necessity of achieving net-zero global greenhouse gas emissions for any climate stabilization target. Until net-zero emissions are achieved, greenhouse gas will accumulate in the atmosphere and oceans, and concentrations will grow, even with deep and profound emissions reduction, mitigation, and adaptation measures. This places a severe constraint on human enterprise: any carbon removed from the earth must be returned to the earth.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Environment, Green Technology, Carbon Emissions, and Decarbonization
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15875. Why the United States Should Remain Engaged on Nuclear Power: Geopolitical and National Security Considerations
- Author:
- Matt Bowen
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Nuclear energy has shown much promise and faced considerable challenges since its origins in the mid-20th century. While the United States drove the early charge for safe nuclear power around the globe, its leadership has waned in recent decades. US reactors now under construction—following no orders for such plants in the United States for several decades—have gone well over planned budgets and schedules. And while the United States was once the leading international supplier of reactors, other countries have since stepped forward to fill that role. Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, as part of its wider work on nuclear energy, is examining the impact of potential American disengagement from nuclear power’s development and where opportunities exist to step back in and shape its future. The program also will assess the US nuclear waste management program and efforts to collaborate with other countries on advanced reactor development as well as options for improvement on both fronts. This effort includes a two-part commentary on some of the benefits the United States might derive from increasing its engagement on nuclear power. The first in the series explored the important role nuclear energy can play in lowering air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the worst potential outcomes of climate change. The second part of the series, this piece, examines the geopolitical and national security implications of the United States and its traditional allies effectively ceding the international nuclear energy marketplace to the Chinese and Russians. The nuclear program’s ultimate goal is to inform readers—policy makers, industry leaders, academics, and others—with objective, research-based analysis. It will strive in the months and years ahead to contribute constructively to a necessary dialogue on the future of nuclear power.
- Topic:
- Security, Energy Policy, National Security, and Nuclear Power
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15876. Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets
- Author:
- David R. Hill
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Speaking at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Technical Conference regarding Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets, adjunct senior research scholar David R. Hill delivered a statement on issues surrounding carbon pricing in the FERC-jurisdictional markets. The purpose of this conference was to discuss considerations related to state-adoption of mechanisms to price carbon dioxide emissions, commonly referred to as carbon pricing, in regions with Commission-jurisdictional organized wholesale electricity markets (i.e., regions with regional transmission organizations/independent system operators, or RTOs/ISOs). The conference focused on carbon pricing approaches where a state (or group of states) sets an explicit carbon price, whether through a price-based or quantity-based approach, and how that carbon price intersects with RTO/ISO-administered markets, addressing both legal and technical issues.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Environment, International Cooperation, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15877. Planning a Sustainable Post-Pandemic Recovery in Latin America and the Caribbean
- Author:
- Mauricio Cardenas and Juan Jose Guzman Ayala
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- In 2020, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) will experience the most severe economic recession in decades. This paper looks at the challenges confronted by LAC and proposes a series of actions to structure a recovery plan that minimizes potential moral hazard effects while aligning fiscal, social, and environmental sustainability priorities.[1] High pre-pandemic sovereign debt levels, worsening credit ratings, and low tax revenues limit the much-needed fiscal space to overcome the present health and economic crises. Most countries in the region are at risk of losing two decades of progress in the fight against poverty and inequality, while their upper-middle income status makes them ineligible for debt relief and aid packages from advanced economies. The focus on solving the current crisis may also delay much-needed progress on climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts, as well as overall improvements in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). We propose a combination of fiscal policy responses combined with new sources of financing to unlock a sharp recovery with minimal harm to fiscal sustainability in the long run. Through expanded public-private partnerships and blended finance structures, governments should be able to leverage private financing in large job-creation undertakings. Additionally, the issuance of SDG-linked sovereign debt and Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) with SDG conditionality could also provide much-needed liquidity at low cost.
- Topic:
- Environment, International Cooperation, Global Recession, Sustainable Development Goals, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Latin America, Caribbean, and North America
15878. New York City’s Building Emissions Law Shows the Importance of Economywide Climate Policy
- Author:
- Noah Kaufman and Yu Ann Tan
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Regulations of greenhouse gas emissions, which are global pollutants, should ideally be coordinated across broad geographic and economic scopes. That way, climate policies can capture important interactions across sectors and borders. However, the United States has repeatedly failed to implement national and economywide climate legislation. That failure has led to an increasing focus on climate actions that are much narrower in scope: sector-specific regulations from subnational governments. A prominent recent example is New York City’s Local Law 97, which limits carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from a large segment of the city’s residential and commercial buildings. This law is among the most ambitious building emissions regulations in the world, but this commentary focuses on a concern with the design of Local Law 97. The law does not account for the planned decarbonization of the local electricity grid over the next decade, and thus fails to sufficiently encourage a shift from fossil fuels to electricity (or “electrification”), a critically important strategy for achieving a low-carbon building sector. Such a narrow focus is common for sector-specific climate regulations. The following sections explain the importance of electrification to deep decarbonization and the failure of building regulations to encourage it, focusing on New York City’s Local Law 97. Fortunately, solutions to the overly narrow focus of the New York City buildings law are readily available, including via New York State’s comprehensive climate strategy, which can align climate action across economic sectors within the state.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Law, Green Technology, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- New York, North America, and United States of America
15879. Nowhere to Hide: Implications for Policy, Industry, and Finance of Satellite-Based Methane Detection
- Author:
- Jonathan Elkind, Erin Blanton, Robert Kleinberg, and Anton Leemhuis
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- In August 2020, the Trump Administration finalized plans to roll back regulations on oil and gas industry emissions of methane from new and modified infrastructure. In the same month, the European Commission gathered stakeholder comments as part of its process to introduce the first EU-wide methane regulations. Though contradictory in direction, these regulatory processes on opposite sides of the Atlantic highlighted a critical climate protection challenge: How can the oil and gas industry—and the regulators who oversee it—best detect and address methane emissions to protect the environment and the climate in particular? The answer to this question will drive planning and operational approaches in the oil and gas industry. It could also significantly affect the future role of natural gas. Five years ago, many energy analysts expected natural gas to serve as a bridge fuel that would result in only half as much climate warming as coal, and fewer local air pollutants. Among other roles, gas was seen as a natural complement for variable wind or solar power—a way to provide firm, dispatchable, low-emissions power. Now that it is apparent that our understanding of methane emissions is poor, the climate implications of gas are far less clear. This poor grasp of methane emissions appears likely to become a thing of the past, however. In roughly the next five years, new satellite detection systems—used in concert with existing systems, aerial monitoring platforms, and ground-based monitors—can increase markedly the transparency surrounding methane leakage. The new wave of satellite monitoring capability has major implications for industry and governments. Our world is rapidly becoming a place in which methane emissions will have nowhere to hide. This commentary, co-authored by the Center on Global Energy Policy and TNO, focuses on detection and response to oil- and gas-related methane emissions, which have been the subject of increasing focus on the part of industry and the public policy community. It addresses the significance of methane emissions for the climate, and the challenges of detecting and accurately quantifying methane emissions. It then explores the evolving capabilities of satellite-based methane detection and monitoring systems, which are expected to advance rapidly in the coming years, and which can be especially powerful when used in concert with aerial and ground-based monitoring systems. It concludes with a discussion of the implications of the changing satellite detection landscape for the oil and gas industry, the finance and investment community, and the realm of public policy.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Gas, Finance, and Methane
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15880. Expanding the Reach of a Carbon Tax: Emissions Impacts of Pricing Combined with Additional Climate Actions
- Author:
- John Larsen
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Putting a price on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions can help governments reduce them rapidly and in a cost-effective manner. While 10 carbon tax bills have been proposed in the 116th US Congress, carbon prices alone are not enough to reach net-zero emissions by midcentury. Additional policies are needed to complement an economy-wide carbon tax and further cut CO2 from the US energy system. This study aims to provide a better understanding of such policy combinations. It projects the energy CO2 emissions impacts of two carbon taxes, starting in 2021, that span the rates in the carbon tax bills in Congress. The “low” tax scenario starts at $30 per ton in 2021 and rises at 5 percent plus inflation per year, reaching $44 by 2030, while the “high” carbon tax starts at $15 per ton and rises $15 per year, reaching $150 by 2030. The paper then describes the barriers inhibiting emissions reductions beyond those achieved by the carbon taxes alone for each major sector: electricity, transportation, buildings, and industry. Finally, it explores the energy system changes needed to overcome those barriers and the policy interventions that could deliver those changes. For certain key energy system changes, it provides quantitative estimates of emissions reductions incremental to the two carbon taxes. This paper is part of a joint effort by Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) and Rhodium Group to help policy makers and other stakeholders understand the important decisions associated with the design of carbon pricing policies and the implications of these decisions. The paper finds the emissions impacts of the low and high carbon taxes alone lead to economy-wide energy CO2 emissions reductions by 2030 of 33 percent and 41 percent, respectively, below 2005 levels. A carbon tax combined with policy actions that support comprehensive, ambitious energy system changes could lead to emissions reductions in the range of 40 to 45 percent, arguably consistent with US midcentury deep decarbonization goals for the energy system. In the 2020s, the bulk of these emissions reductions are likely to occur in the power sector, even under a broad decarbonization strategy, due to the significant barriers to large near-term emissions reductions in the transportation, buildings, and industrial sectors.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Carbon Tax, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15881. Roundtable on Climate-Oriented Economic Recovery
- Author:
- Center on Global Energy Policy
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- On July 2, 2020, Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP) and Harvard University jointly hosted a virtual roundtable on climate-oriented economic recovery and stimulus packages. Stakeholders included senior experts from universities and policy institutes as well as former high-level government officials. Key questions discussed at the roundtable, held under the Chatham House Rule, included the following: What are the appropriate objectives of economic stimulus and recovery packages? What clean energy lessons from the 2009 American Reinvestment and Recovery Act are most relevant to the design of economic stimulus legislation today? What climate and energy policies are best suited to deliver on both economic stimulus and climate objectives? How does near-term climate-oriented stimulus complement medium-term climate policy and yield progress on long-term climate goals? The following is an overview of the discussion.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, and Economic Recovery
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15882. Shifts in Global Sanctions Policy, and What They Mean for the Future
- Author:
- Richard Nephew
- Publication Date:
- 11-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The last four years have borne witness to a range of new sanctions, policies, and approaches around the world. Some of these were predicted in November 2016, as Donald Trump took to sanctions far more than his predecessors, using them to tackle virtually every foreign policy problem he encountered. In fact, Trump’s use of sanctions transcended their typical usage in both form and content, as he employed tariffs and other more traditional “trade” tools to try to manage a bevy of nontrade problems. The long-term effects of this decision have yet to be felt or properly understood. It may be that Trump was ahead of the curve in seeing the fracturing of the global liberal economic order and employed the US economy for strategic advantage while it was still ahead. It may also be that Trump undermined the US position in the global economy through his policies, if not actually hastened the demise of this system of managing global economics. Time and the evolution of policy in other global power centers will eventually tell. The shifting approach to sanctions policy by a variety of other states is a manifestation of the potential effects of Trump’s policy choices in using US economic power. From the EU to Russia to China, other countries have changed long-standing policy approaches as they relate to sanctions, either to respond to or perhaps to take advantage of the new paths forged by the United States. The actions that they have taken are not “unprecedented” per se, as each of these countries or organizations has—at times—embraced policies that are consistent with some of these current actions. But, in aggregate, they describe an overall shift in how the world treats sanctions and trade policy, particularly that as practiced by the United States.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, and Sanctions
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America
15883. Between Eurasia and the Middle East: Azerbaijan’s New Geopolitics
- Author:
- Svante Cornell
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- Azerbaijan’s geopolitics have changed considerably in the last decade, along with the growing general instability in its neighborhood. Gone are the days symbolized by the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline’s construction, when a relatively stable balance existed between a loose Russian-led alignment including Iran and Armenia, and an informal entente between the United States and Turkey, which supported the independence of Azerbaijan and Georgia and the construction of direct energy transportation routes to Europe.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Energy Policy, and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Eurasia, Middle East, and Azerbaijan
15884. Geopolitical Keystone: Azerbaijan and the Global Position of the Silk Road Region
- Author:
- Nikolas Gvosdev
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- Historian Peter Frankopan concludes his magisterial sweep of world history, entitled The Silk Roads (2015), by noting that at the beginning of the twenty-first century, “networks and connections are quietly being knitted together across the spine of Asia; or rather, they are being restored. The Silk Roads are rising again.” The Caspian-Black Sea mega-region, to use the formulation of Amur Hajiyev, director of the Modern Turkey Study Center at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, serves as the buckle connecting these various belts together— linking the northern Middle East with Central Asia and Southeastern Europe. Former U.S. ambassador to Azerbaijan Matthew Bryza prefers the term “greater Caspian region,” which he defines as “the area stretching from India to the Black and Mediterranean Seas with the Caspian Sea at the center.”
- Topic:
- History, Geopolitics, and Silk Road
- Political Geography:
- Azerbaijan and Global Focus
15885. Against ‘the Blob’: America’s Foreign Policy in Eurasia’s Heartland is Becoming its Own Greatest Enemy
- Author:
- Michael A. Reynolds
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- As this article goes to press, America and the world are in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic. The pandemic’s end remains invisible, yet it has already wreaked extraordinary economic disruption around the globe. Inevitably, political upheaval will follow. Indeed, the strain of the pandemic has now catalyzed social and political unrest throughout the United States on a level not seen in half a century.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy and Grand Strategy
- Political Geography:
- United States and Eurasia
15886. Not A Top European Priority: Can the EU Engage Geopolitically in the South Caucasus?
- Author:
- Amanda Paul
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The European Union has been active in the South Caucasus since Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia regained independence in 1991. While the EU has established itself as an important partner for all three states over the past three decades, the South Caucasus is certainly not a top foreign policy priority for Brussels. Despite hopes that EU policies could act as transformative tools to help strengthen stability, security, and democracy as well as bring about a more cohesive and resilient region, the results have been rather patchy from the EU’s perspective. Likewise, expectations that the EU would develop a more geostrategic and security orientated policy in order to balance Russia have been dashed.
- Topic:
- European Union and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Europe and South Caucasus
15887. Five-Star Hubs: Conceptual Key to Innovation and Prosperity
- Author:
- Taleh Ziyadov
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- One thousand years ago two fundamental human concepts, namely history and time, were united for the first time by a great figure of the Silk Road region. Serving at the court of Qabus ibn Wushmagir (a great scion of the Ziyarid dynasty that ruled over the Southern Caspian basin in present-day Iran), a young man of around thirty by the name of Abu Rayhan Muhammad al-Biruni was provided with the wherewithal to engage in a lifelong, systematic quest to try to understand nations and societies— irrespective of geographic or cultural provenance—as they understood themselves. Surpassing even Herodotus and Thucydides in investigative open-mindedness, Biruni also went on to become the first to standardize a single, objective timescale measuring system or matrix within which all of the particulars of human history could be compared chronologically side by side.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Innovation, Economic Development, and Silk Road
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Eurasia, and Global Focus
15888. Eurasia, the Hegemon, and the Three Sovereigns
- Author:
- Pepe Escobar
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- I t is my contention that there are essentially four truly sovereign states in the world today, at least amongst the major powers: the United States, the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. These four sovereigns—I call them the Hegemon and the Three Sovereigns—stand at the vanguard of the ultra-postmodern world, characterized by the supremacy of data algorithms and techno-financialization ruling over politics.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, Power Politics, Geopolitics, Emerging Powers, and Regional Power
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Iran, Global Focus, and Russian Federation
15889. Silk Road Pathways: The China–Central Asia–West Asia Economic Corridor
- Author:
- Yu Hongjun
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- Since the outbreak of 2008 world financial crisis, issues such as lackluster economic growth around the world and lack of progress in regional cooperation have not been resolved. Conservatism, isolationism, racism, populism, and unilateralism are on the march; political and social movements based on opposition to economic globalization are in vogue; and policymakers as much as ordinary people are expressing concern about the future of the world. Based on his observations and thoughts with regards to modern international relations, as well as his commitment towards a common destiny for mankind, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the launch of the Silk Road Economic Belt and Twenty-first Century Maritime Silk Road, which together form the globally influential Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
- Topic:
- International Political Economy and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Asia, and Global Focus
15890. Completing the Southern Gas Corridor: SGC in a Post-pandemic World
- Author:
- Akhmed Gumbatov
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The global spread of the latest zoonotic virus, commonly known as COVID19, has become an unprecedented calamity for all humankind. By the time this publication goes to press, it is likely that worldwide around 25 million people will have been infected and the number of lives lost will approach the one million mark.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, International Political Economy, Natural Resources, Gas, and Pandemic
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Caucasus, Asia, and Global Focus
15891. The Karabakh Peace Process: Rebuilding Trust for International Engagement
- Author:
- Dennis Sammut
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The engagement of the international community in dealing with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has been somewhat erratic and the efforts to broker a peace deal largely unsuccessful. Short outbursts of violence now regularly alternate with even shorter moments of optimism when peace appears within reach. Since the ceasefire agreement of 1994, geopolitical considerations have contributed to the reinforcement of deeply entrenched local animosities, fears, and distrusts, all of which have reduced the ability of the international community to act as an honest broker. A conflict that many believed could have been defused and resolved 30 years ago now appears intractable and unsolvable.
- Topic:
- Conflict Resolution, Political Violence, Peacekeeping, Military Affairs, International Community, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- South Caucasus and Nagorno-Karabakh
15892. Iran’s Longstanding Cooperation with Armenia: Domestic Azerbaijani Opposition May be Rising
- Author:
- Brenda Shaffer
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- When the Soviet Union collapsed in December 1991, Iran’s stable northern boundary suddenly became a shared border with five states: land borders with Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan, and maritime borders with Kazakhstan and Russia. Tehran viewed this momentous change as a source of several new security challenges. Among these were maritime delimitation in the Caspian Sea and the establishment of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, two states that shared ethnic ties with large numbers of Iranian citizens.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation and Geopolitics
- Political Geography:
- Iran, Armenia, and Azerbaijan
15893. The OSCE and Minorities in the Silk Road Region: Fostering Social Cohesion and Integration
- Author:
- Lamberto Zannier and Eleonora Lotti
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- At the beginning of the 1990s new conflicts erupted in Europe as new borders appeared on the map following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia. As emerging states were striving to assert new identities (or revive old ones), various minorities found themselves living within new national borders, which in a number of cases provoked instability and conflict, with geopolitics complicating these dynamics even further. As quickly became apparent, some of these divisions were so deep that a number of those conflicts remain unresolved.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation, Minorities, Geopolitics, Silk Road, and OSCE
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Eurasia, and Asia
15894. Strategic Equilibrium: Azerbaijan’s Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Hikmat Hajiyev
- Publication Date:
- 09-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- We all know that today Azerbaijan has good relations with its neighbors—except one, for obvious reasons—and that the country plays a crucial role in the development of the region. The development of mutually beneficial relations with neighbors, based on understanding and respect, is the foreign policy priority of Azerbaijan as defined by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev. The realization of economic projects and the increase of prosperity was the result of the establishment of an atmosphere of partnership, both with regional and other partners. And one can refer to such a successful foreign policy with the academic term “strategic balancing.” But we can more properly classify it as an independent and pragmatic foreign policy based on the national interest.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy
- Political Geography:
- Azerbaijan
15895. A Most Significant Geopolitical Development: Strategic Benefits and Strategic Focus
- Author:
- Metthew Bryza
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The November 10th, 2020, trilateral agreement signed by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, and Russian President Vladimir Putin could become the most significant geopolitical development in the South Caucasus since the collapse of the Soviet Union—perhaps even more than the establishment of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil and Baku-TbilisiErzurum natural gas pipelines. But it is not yet clear that key actors in the Transatlantic community appreciate this opportunity, especially Washington and Paris, who along with Moscow, comprise the Co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, the supposedly impartial mediating body of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The trilateral agreement defines a peace settlement in line with the framework unofficially agreed by the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan over a decade ago, and thus stands a good chance to hold. The so-called “Basic Principles” or “Madrid Principles” were originally tabled by the American Russian, and French Co-chairs of the Minsk Group in November 2007 at a meeting of OSCE foreign ministers in Madrid.
- Topic:
- Development, Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Geopolitics, and OSCE
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Eurasia, Asia, South Caucasus, and Nagorno-Karabakh
15896. Reassessing U.S.-Azerbaijani Relations: A Shared Imperative to Look Ahead
- Author:
- Robert F. Cekuta
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The U.S.-Azerbaijan relationship remains important to both countries, but it is time to reevaluate and update how they engage with each other. The Second Karabakh War is the most visible of the reasons for such a reassessment, given Azerbaijan’s military successes, Russia’s headline role in securing the November 2020 agreement that halted the fighting, and the need to undertake the extremely difficult work of avoiding a new war and building a peace. But China’s high profile economic, diplomatic, and security activities across Eurasia, coupled with the results of the November 2020 election in the United States, have also significantly altered the diplomatic environment. Lastly, multinational challenges—such as the economic, social, and other ramifications of the COVID-19 pandemic or the realities of climate change—make the need for revaluation, dialogue, and mapping out new directions in the two countries’ relations even more apparent.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Diplomacy
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Eurasia, and Azerbaijan
15897. While You Were Sleeping: Winds of Change in the South Caucasus
- Author:
- Alper Coşkun
- Publication Date:
- 12-2020
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Baku Dialogues
- Institution:
- ADA University
- Abstract:
- The flaring up of active combat in the Southern Caucasus in late September 2020 between Azerbaijan and Armenia initially seemed to catch many by surprise. An immediate upside of this turn of events was seen in the rekindled interest it generated in the three decade-old conflict in and around Nagorno-Karabakh, which was often misleadingly labeled as being “frozen.” It also acted as a crude reminder of the need for consistency in advocating respect for a rulesbased international order.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Geopolitics, and International Order
- Political Geography:
- Armenia, Azerbaijan, and South Caucasus
15898. Levelized Cost of Carbon Abatement: An Improved Cost-Assessment Methodology for a Net-Zero Emissions World
- Author:
- Julio Friedmann
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- New policies are needed to achieve the net-zero emissions required to address climate change. To succeed, these policies must lead directly to swift and profound abatement of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Policies that appear effective on the surface too often have little real impact or are costly compared to alternatives. Governments, investors, and decision makers require better tools focused on understanding the real emissions impacts and costs of policies and other measures in order to design the most effective policies required to create a net-zero world. This paper, from the Carbon Management Research Initiative at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, puts forward a levelized cost of carbon abatement, LCCA, an improved methodology for comparing technologies and policies based on the cost of carbon abatement. LCCA measures how much CO2 can be reduced by a specific investment or policy, taking into account relevant factors related to geography and specific asset. It calculates how much an investment or policy costs on the basis of dollars per ton of emissions reduced. Previous marginal or levelized cost methodologies that assess carbon reduction options often failed to consider the specific contexts that determine the real, all-in costs of a policy and the real, all-in impacts on emissions. These costs and impacts can vary depending on the contexts and details of geography, existing infrastructure, timing, and other factors. LCCA attempts to improve understanding of the real climate costs and benefits by including specific and local CO2 reductions in all estimations and consistently applying standard financial metrics that more accurately represent and compare costs. Investors and policy makers interested in climate, energy, and decarbonization must balance many competing options. The scenarios and analyses presented in this report can provide a foundation for wider analytical applications, and can help focus investments in innovation for hard-to-abate sectors, determine essential infrastructure required to facilitate market uptake, and estimate the value of grants in deployment. If the LCCA is not estimated, decision makers will not know the value of their policies and investments in terms of achieving greenhouse gas reductions and their carbon goals or the opportunity costs of taking one path over another. Finally, although carbon abatement costs are only one consideration of many in crafting climate policy (e.g., jobs, trade, domestic security), LCCA analysis will deploy efficient and effective approaches of GHG reduction and help avoid waste. This paper uses four scenarios to illustrate the discipline and value of LCCA analysis: first, the $/ton cost of using new solar power (utility or rooftop) to displace power-sector emissions in one market (California); second, the $/ton costs of new rooftop solar generation in several states with different solar resources, grid mixes, and policy environments; third, the $/ton cost of various technology options to decarbonize a range of primary iron and steel production methods; and fourth, the $/ton cost associated with sustainable aviation fuels and direct air capture and storage of CO2. The analysis provides insight into (a) the highest value for carbon reduction, (b) the relative discrete costs and benefits for decarbonization options, and (c) the potential shortfalls in policy or portfolio goals. In this context, the LCCA estimates for even simple cases can prove complicated depending on how emissions reductions are achieved. For example, our first scenario finds the costs of reducing emissions by replacing existing power generation in California with solar PV range from $60/ton (utility solar PV displacing natural gas power generation) to $300/ton (rooftop solar replacing a grid-average mix of generation) to more than $10,000/ton (any solar replacement of nuclear or hydropower). These large ranges are contingent on policy, investment, and/or technical decisions.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Natural Resources, Green Technology, and Carbon Emissions
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
15899. Potential Implications of the COVID-19 Crisis on Long-Term Electricity Demand in the United States
- Author:
- A.J. Goulding, Mugwe Kiragu, and David Nour Berro
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has caused unprecedented changes in the ways people interact and approach economic activities. Electricity demand has declined and usage patterns have been altered, changes that could remain even after the pandemic ends. Failure to properly account for these declines in demand could lead to excess capacity in the electric power sector, added costs for consumers, and losses for investors. This paper, from the power sector program at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, presents a methodology to quantify potential permanent reductions in demand triggered by the pandemic. The authors first identify how electricity demand changed in the United States following the 2008–2009 global financial crisis, or “Great Recession,” the last event to cause a major reduction in consumption. They then analyze the unique ways in which demand patterns may change over the next three to five years as a result of the coronavirus, followed by some illustrative calculations of the potential impact. Finally, the authors discuss the implications for policy makers with regard to electricity sector evolution. The paper finds that the COVID-19 crisis is likely to result in a long-term decline in annual electricity consumption, though less than that observed after the global financial crisis. It is also likely to accelerate changes in the structure of electricity demand that were already underway.
- Topic:
- Energy Policy, Electricity, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
15900. The Qatari Sanctions Episode
- Author:
- Richard Nephew
- Publication Date:
- 10-2020
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
- Abstract:
- On June 5, 2017, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Egypt, and Bahrain announced that they were cutting diplomatic ties with and imposing sanctions on Qatar. The most formidable of these sanctions was a comprehensive blockade of Qatar, which involved the closure of the land border between Qatar and Saudi Arabia as well as banning Qatari planes from entering these countries’airspace. The coalition then embarked on a limited program of sanctions advocacy, seeking US, European, East Asian, and other regional support for their efforts. Nearly three years after the crisis began, Qatar’s economic indicators all point to the positive and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has broadly concluded that the Qatari economy is structurally sound. Qatar faces some of the same issues and tensions that other hydrocarbon-dependent economies experience, but is in a comparatively strong position, particularly as relates to its future sanctions resilience as will be described below. This paper, part of the broader sanctions work from the Energy Security program at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, sets aside whether the cause of the Qatari dispute with its neighbors justified the use of sanctions and examines the significance of the execution of those sanctions. Qatar’s experience is not replicable in many contexts, given its sizable advantages in available resources. Nonetheless, how the country responded to and—in this paper’s assessment—effectively defeated the sanctions campaign mounted against it points to several lessons about the design and implementation of sanctions.
- Topic:
- Diplomacy, Military Strategy, Sanctions, and Regionalism
- Political Geography:
- Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Gulf Nations, and UAE