Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Content Type Policy Brief

31. State Fragility and Development Cooperation: Putting the Empirics to Use in Policy and Planning

Author:
Charles Martin-Shields and Diana Koester
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
State fragility, which describes how different components of a state do (or do not) function, is a central concept for understanding how development activities and policies in complex political, humanitarian and conflict-affected contexts will (or will not) work in practice. Using fragility as a lens, we use feminist development policy and forced displacement as examples to demonstrate how different empirical conceptualisations of fragility can be used to uncover potential challenges and identify opportunities for more comprehensive policy and programming. These examples are only two ways one can apply the concepts of fragility of the OECD and the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). Indeed, these and other empirical concepts of state fragility have many applications and can be used to measure and understand state–society, conflict and humanitarian dynamics in myriad ways. The longest-running among these kinds of models is the Fund for Peace’s Fragile States Index (Fund for Peace, 2023). Other models focus on state fragility as a function of different aspects of “stateness”. This includes IDOS’s Constellations of State Fragility typology, which clusters types of fragility based on strengths/weaknesses in key dimensions of statehood (Grävingholt et al., 2019). Some organisations have moved beyond an exclusive focus on the functioning of the state, with the OECD currently defining fragility contexts as the combination of risks and insufficient coping capacities of multiple levels of governance systems and/or communities to manage, absorb or mitigate those risks (OECD, 2016). The IDOS and OECD concepts do not rank countries, and the methods used in both models allow them to be applied to different levels of analysis. Essentially, these empirical conceptualisations of state fragility can serve as useful heuristics for the policy-makers responsible for setting policy agendas in fragile contexts.
Topic:
Development, Fragile States, Fragility, Cooperation, and Development Policy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

32. Getting Special Drawing Rights Right: Opportunities for Re-channelling SDRs to Vulnerable Countries

Author:
Jürgen K. Zattler
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Many developing countries are still grappling with the consequences of the pandemic and the associated high debt burdens while facing huge financing needs, inter alia related to climate change. In response, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued $650 billion in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). The G7 and G20 have committed to re-channelling SDR 100 billion of their allocation to developing countries (on-lending, recycling and re-channelling are used interchangeably in this policy brief). The question now is how to implement these commitments in a way that promotes the global transformation and at the same time supports debt sustainability. It is important to note that there are certain restrictions on the re-channelling of SDRs. Most importantly, the re-channelling must be consistent with the SDR’s status as an international reserve asset. There are different interpretations of these requirements. The IMF has encouraged the use of the Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT) and the Resilience and Sustainability Trust (RST) for re-channelling. It has also signalled general support for re-channelling SDRs to the multilateral development banks (MDBs). The European Central Bank (ECB) has taken a more restrictive stance. Does the re-channelling of SDRs through the above-mentioned IMF trusts (“the current on-lending option”) effectively support the global transformation? Measured against this objective, the current on-lending regime has two shortcomings. First, it does not sufficiently link foreign exchange support to deep structural transformation. Second, it does not allow funds to be leveraged in the private capital market. In this policy brief, we discuss a promising alternative: recycling SDRs for MDB hybrid capital (“the hybrid capital option”). This option can overcome the two drawbacks of the current system. At the same time, it has its own challenges. Moreover, both the current on-lending option and the hybrid capital option raise concerns about debt sustainability. If implemented in their current forms, they would risk exacerbating vulnerable countries’ debt problems. It would therefore be desirable to modify these options to better integrate debt implications. This could be done by using the on-lent SDRs primarily for programmes that are not “expenditure-based”, but rather help to improve the composition of expenditure and revenue in a socially equitable manner, for example the introduction of regulatory standards, feebates and carbon pricing, or the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies. Such an approach could have the added benefit of making previously sceptical member states more receptive to the hybrid capital proposal. The mid-term review of the RST, scheduled for May 2024, as well as the full review in 2025 provide good opportunities to further explore some of the issues raised in this policy brief. In addition, the brief identifies three ways in which interested shareholders of the IMF and MDBs could advance the debate on the hybrid capital option.
Topic:
Development, Sustainability, COVID-19, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Global Focus

33. Multidimensional Impact of COVID-19 on Education and Implications on Inclusive Recovery

Author:
Gee Young Oh
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This report aims to present the findings of Oh et al. (2023), which analyzes the post-pandemic inequality levels in developing countries and derives policy implications for Korea's international development cooperation (IDC) to help reduce inequality, especially in the education sector. The impact of COVID-19 on education is multidimensional, with varying levels of heterogeneity across countries, regions, households, and individual stakeholders, including students, parents, and teachers. To comprehensively understand this multidimensionality, the study compares situations in two countries to explore inter- and intra-country educational disparities. After identifying such multidimensionality, the study derives policy implications on how Korea’s IDC can better target post-pandemic inequality in education.
Topic:
Development, Education, International Cooperation, Inequality, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

34. The Role of Multilateral Development Banks in Financing Energy Transition in South America

Author:
Maria Elena Rodriguez, Rafaela Mello Rodrigues de Sá, Octávio Henrique Alves Costa de Oliveira, and Renan Guimarães Canellas de Oliveira
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
BRICS Policy Center
Abstract:
With the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015, the world institutionalized the goal of keeping global temperature rise below 2ºC, based on efforts to adapt to and mitigate climate change. It is in this context that the actors involved presented their commitments to establish policies and strategies to reduce carbon emissions in different sectors of the economy. This process of reducing emissions can be called decarbonization and consists of replacing fossil energy sources with clean renewables, in addition to encouraging the use of electrification technology, such as electric cars. This movement promotes transformation toward a low-carbon economy in various sectors. In the energy sector, this transformation is called the clean energy transition, as it attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the energy matrix. For this to happen, increasing the use of renewables over using fossil fuels such as coal and oil is encouraged.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Finance, Multilateralism, Paris Agreement, and Energy Transition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

35. Europe’s development and peacebuilding cuts: Securing short-term interests, risking long-term security

Author:
Katariina Mustasilta
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Development cooperation budgets are tightening in the EU amid economic pressures and a focus on security and defence. Two broad shifts are taking place in EU and member state investments in peacebuilding and conflict prevention: a general decline in funding and decreasing attention to conflict-affected regions and countries in particular. Local and international conflict prevention and peacebuilding actors need to frame their work to align with the EU’s economic, security and geopolitical interests in order to remain relevant in an era of strategic competition. The implications of the shifts in funding will depend on how changes are implemented and under what types of strategies. A general risk is that policy decisions will be based on a short-term and largely reactive rationale at the expense of a long-term perspective on Europe’s interests.
Topic:
Security, Development, International Cooperation, European Union, Crisis Management, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Europe

36. Renewable Energy and Electricity Interconnection Megaprojects in North Africa: Prospects for Euro-North Africa Cooperation

Author:
Michaël Tanchum, Hussein Suleiman, Alexander P. Martin, Tristano Sainati, and Jose Rodrigo Juarez Cornelio
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
IEMed/EuroMeSCo
Abstract:
This Joint Policy Study delves into North Africa’s renewable energy landscape, examining the potential and challenges of megaprojects in the region. With a specific focus on renewable energy production and exports, it explores the intricacies of megaprojects in Morocco, Egypt, Algeria and Tunisia, assessing their successes, hurdles, and future potential. North Africa, especially the Sahara Desert, has vast potential for renewable energy production due to its exceptionally high solar irradiation levels, positioning it as an ideal site for solar energy projects. Economically and geopolitically, there is a strong rationale for Euro-North African collaboration to enhance North Africa’s ability to generate and export renewable energy in a way that benefits both regions. However, despite this significant potential, North African countries have faced numerous geopolitical, economic, societal and infrastructural obstacles in fully capitalising on these resources.
Topic:
Development, Infrastructure, Electricity, Renewable Energy, and Solar Power
Political Geography:
Europe and North Africa

37. The Maghreb maze: Harmonising divergent European policies in North Africa

Author:
Anthony Dworkin
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
The Maghreb policies of the four most influential EU member states are diverging, driven by national politics and their interaction with developments in the region. Italy is pushing an ‘engagement-first’ strategy for Tunisia and building energy links with Algeria, while Spain has tilted strongly towards Morocco. France’s relations with Maghreb countries are complicated by historical legacies and regional expectations, Germany is pulling back as hopes for democratic reform have faded. These divisions risk allowing Maghreb leaders to set the agenda of relations with Europe, frustrating longer-term European interests in promoting stability, reform, and effective governance. A better European approach would use strong bilateral relationships as entry points to pursue a more coordinated policy, building on areas in which EU interests converge.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Development, Reform, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe, Algeria, North Africa, Morocco, and Maghreb

38. Mind the Gap: Bridging the Divide between Cooperation Providers

Author:
Beata Cichocka, Rachael Calleja, Sara Casadevall Bellés, and Emma Mawdsley
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Despite the increasing imperative for cross-provider collaboration, the quest for a truly “global” development paradigm remains elusive, marked by persistent divides between different types of development providers’ normative frameworks, models, experiences, capacities, and institutional allegiances. This paper explores the potential role of countries to act as bridges across these varying institutional, normative, or technical “distances” between providers. We begin by examining why, when, and under what conditions countries choose to act as bridges, given their differing capacities, credibility, knowledge, and willingness to act in the role. We then identify some common types and illustrative examples of bridging countries, including “dual donors,” “development experience” bridges, “political” bridges, and “geographic or cultural” bridges, and explore some of the most common types of actions that they can undertake. While all of these actions—whether joint project implementation, hosting forums, brokering agreements, or contributing to the creation of more inclusive norms and multilateral spaces— require some level of both political and technical commitment, they vary in terms of the level of ambition and mutual trust required to undertake action and therefore provide a broad range of options suited to a variety of contexts, agendas, and actors wishing to play a bridging role. Following a brief examination of the benefits and risks associated with bridging, the paper concludes with some policy recommendations for bridging countries that wish to approach this ambitious challenge more strategically.
Topic:
Development, Government, Donors, and Collaboration
Political Geography:
Global Focus

39. Maximising EU Concessional Finance for Greater Leverage and Impact: An Options Spread

Author:
Mikaela Gavas, Samuel Pleeck, Andrew Rogerson, San Bilal, and Karim Karaki
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Already constrained by the economic aftershocks of COVID-19, the impact of the war in Ukraine, and the food and climate crisis, low-income countries and lower-middle-income countries now face a combination of soaring debt and high interest rates. Confronted with insufficient liquidity to respond to these challenges and unable to access capital markets, they need additional concessional finance, in the form of grants and soft loans. The European Union (EU) already provides concessional finance, but it is not nearly enough to respond to their growing needs. With European budgets under more strain than ever, this paper puts forward the case for finding ways to maximise the overall efficiency and impact of European concessional finance and in doing so, better articulating and combining grants and concessional loans in its support and investment toolbox. To remain relevant and maintain relationships and influence with partner countries–even more in a world characterised by the polycrisis and geopolitical fragmentation–the EU will have to step up its game when it comes to providing more strategic concessional finance. The paper sets out six complementary and non-mutually exclusive options for maximising EU concessional finance with a view to a strategic set of decisions to be made for the next EU Multiannual Financial Framework.
Topic:
Development, European Union, Financial Institutions, and Sustainable Development
Political Geography:
Europe

40. Disinvesting from Low-Value Health Technologies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Between a Solution to the Current Fiscal Crises and a Costly Mirage?

Author:
Adrian Gheorghe and Pete Baker
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
In this policy paper we summarise what is known about healthcare disinvestment and outline documented experiences in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to draw insights on what has worked, to what extent, and under what conditions. We reviewed the published literature on documented experiences of attempted healthcare disinvestment in LMICs. We identified two common scenarios when disinvestment initiatives were attempted, namely “one-off” and “systematic” initiatives, and characterised them in terms of objectives, resources and political will. We found four documented examples of one-off disinvestment initiatives—Iran, Malaysia, Romania, and Vietnam, two documented examples of systematic disinvestment initiatives by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in LMICs—Brazil and China, as well as a range of countries like Thailand, India, and Ghana that carry out systematic disinvestment through routine HTA processes. We conclude that disinvestment is costly, time-consuming, and rarely as successful as policymakers intend. Key considerations to improve the chances of success include whether strong pre-existing health prioritisation systems exist (such as an HTA agency) and whether the design of initiatives are tightly matched to the level of political will, the policy objective, and available resources.
Topic:
Development, Science and Technology, Global Health, and Fiscal Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus