Search

Begin New Search Content Type Policy Brief

1. What Happens If the United States Leaves the WTO?

Author:
James Bacchus
Publication Date:
06-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
Aresolution before Congress calls for US withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO). Both international law and US law permit withdrawal. The case for withdrawal, however, is misguided and misinformed. Much of what is said and widely believed about the effects of WTO membership on the United States is simply untrue. In fact, American membership in the WTO has been for decades and remains today enormously beneficial economically to US businesses, workers, and consumers. Withdrawal by the United States from the WTO would result in the loss of many of these economic benefits, including those derived from decades of accumulated trade commitments made by the 165 other member countries on thousands of different US goods and services traded within the WTO legal framework; those resulting from the commercial shield of WTO rules forbidding trade discrimination against US exports; and those emanating from the availability to the United States of an impartial, binding, and enforceable system of WTO trade dispute settlement. Moreover, withdrawal by the United States would cede US leadership in the WTO to other leading trading countries, including the second-largest trading country in the world, China. Trade is a win-win economically for all WTO members. WTO membership maximizes the overall economic gains from engaging in trade. The United States should remain in the WTO and help lead it toward needed reforms that will make it more beneficial to all in the modern global economy of the 21st century.
Topic:
Economics, Geopolitics, Trade, and WTO
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. The New Development Bank’s Contribution to the Energy Transition Process in the BRICS Countries (2016-2023)

Author:
Maria Elena Rodriguez, Rafaela Mello Rodrigues de Sá, Octávio Henrique Alves Costa de Oliveira, and Renan Guimarães Canellas de Oliveira
Publication Date:
12-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
BRICS Policy Center
Abstract:
Considering the growing relevance of the Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) in the task of financing the global energy transition process, it is important to understand the efforts of these institutions to establish projects aimed at reducing carbon emissions in the most diverse sectors of the economy, and especially in the energy sector. This document looks specifically at the role that the New Development Bank (NDB) plays in this process, presenting an overview of its loan portfolio and targets in terms of contributions to the energy transition process. The NDB, also known as the BRICS Bank, stands out in its institutional strategies in the area of Clean Energy, one of its operational objectives, setting a target for the year 2026 of directing 40% of all its financing to projects aimed at climate change, including operations that contribute to the energy transition (NDB, 2022a, p. 28).
Topic:
Development, Banks, BRICS, Energy Transition, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Iran, Indonesia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Ethiopia, Egypt, and United Arab Emirates

3. Taking Stock of Brexit

Author:
Iain Begg
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
J ohn Curtice, the UK’s foremost polling expert, wrote recently that ‘politicians do not talk much about Brexit these days’ (Curtice, 2025). In Germany, too, Brexit has largely disappeared from view, according to a prominent journalist consulted in the preparation of this blog. Another expert, Anand Menon, told AP News on the fifth anniversary of the UK leaving the EU that Brexit had ‘changed our economy’, adding that ‘our politics has been changed quite fundamentally’ (Lawless, 2025). His view is that, in electoral politics, conventional political cleavages have been supplanted by ‘a new division around Brexit’ (Lawless, 2025). In much of the EU, the 2025 anniversary elicited many articles characterised by a combination of acknowledgment that Brexit had failed to deliver, resignation about the UK’s fate and a sense of growing disinterest. The Austrian newspaper Kourier summed up these sentiments: “Von skurril bis tragisch: Eine Bilanz nach fünf Jahren Brexit [From bizarre to tragic, a stocktake after five years of Brexit]” (Bauer, 2025). However, Brexit is a process, rather than a discrete event, and some of its effects are both contested and take time, and are often seen through ideological rather than analytic lenses. A useful way to assess its consequences is to distinguish between three key dimensions: economic, social and governance related. The overall economic effects of Brexit have mainly been negative on both sides of the English Channel, albeit uneven, although some critics regard the magnitudes as having been exaggerated.
Topic:
European Union, Economy, Brexit, and Domestic Politics
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

4. Energy Data Spaces and Market Power: a new challenge for data sovereignty and its governance

Author:
Emanuele Giovannetti
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
This paper examines how the digitalisation of energy markets, driven by smart meter data and Energy Data Spaces, is reshaping competition in retail electricity services. It analyses the implications for market power, consumer outcomes, and data sovereignty, highlighting the regulatory challenges posed by data-driven business models that operate across national boundaries.
Topic:
Markets, Governance, Regulation, Digitalization, and Energy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Adapting Benin’s Battle with Violent Militant Groups

Author:
Anouar Boukhars
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Africa Center for Strategic Studies
Abstract:
Persistent militant Islamist group attacks in the northern border regions of Benin have posed a growing security threat to the coastal West African region. Benin has made noteworthy institutional reforms to strengthen its defense and security forces. Yet, accelerated and refocused training is needed to translate this into more adaptive, operational capabilities to effectively counter the militant insurgency. Empowering local commanders, pairing enhanced force mobility with strike capability, and fusing interagency intelligence sharing are priority operational adaptations needed to sustain pressure on the insurgents. Effective counterinsurgency in northern Benin requires operationalizing a population-centric protection model and ethos embedded within the defense and security forces.
Topic:
Governance, Reform, Islamism, and Instability
Political Geography:
Africa and Benin

6. The means of prediction and the production function of AI

Author:
Maximilian Kasy
Publication Date:
02-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Economics for Inclusive Prosperity (EfIP)
Abstract:
The real AI governance challenge: Who gets to decide what AI systems optimize for? Current debates miss that AI conflicts are between different groups of people, not humans vs. machines. Power flows from control of AI inputs: Those who control the means of prediction (data, computing power, expertise, and energy) determine AI objectives. Current governance approaches fail: Individual privacy rights and market mechanisms can’t address AI’s collective harms and benefits. Democratic control is the solution: Give stakeholders affected by AI decisions a voice in setting AI objectives.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Regulation, Privacy, Artificial Intelligence, and Prediction
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. How the EU can pursue strategic cooperation on secondary raw materials with the Western Balkans

Author:
Edoardo Righetti, Deniz Tekin, and Vasileios Rizos
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)
Abstract:
Europe’s green and digital transitions are increasing demand for critical raw materials (CRMs), just as geopolitical risks and trade tensions are reshaping global supply chains. In recent years, the EU has taken steps to secure and diversify supplies through building strategic partnerships with resource-rich countries, which also includes recovering CRMs from mine waste and tailings. The Western Balkans region stands out as a natural partner, given their already close integration with EU markets and transport networks, and their legacy of old industrial sites and mine tailings. Such a partnership could lead to several mutual benefits – for the EU, more resilient and circular CRM value chains which correspond with its strategic autonomy and sustainability objectives, and for the Western Balkans, by rehabilitating legacy sites and advancing green and circular policies tied to the Green Agenda and the enlargement framework. This CEPS Policy Brief dives into three priority areas for EU-Western Balkans cooperation on secondary raw materials that policymakers should pay more attention to.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, European Union, Supply Chains, Green Transition, Digital Transition, and Critical Minerals
Political Geography:
Europe and Western Balkans

8. Restraint and Diplomacy in Arctic Policy: Cooperation Amid U.S.-Russia-China Tensions

Author:
Pavel Devyatkin
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
In recent years, the Arctic has become the site of both great-power cooperation and competition. While the 2025 Alaska summit between Presidents Putin and Trump reflected a thaw in U.S.–Russia relations, U.S. interest in acquiring Greenland has cast doubt on continued U.S. cooperation with both Russia and China in the region. This brief details how a combination of restraint and proactive diplomacy in the Arctic — built upon shared interests and a recognition of competitive coexistence — will best serve the United States. The second Trump administration has called for American Arctic dominance, viewing the region as an energy source and as an opportunity to monopolize resources and to establish its Western Hemisphere force posture. Russia views the Arctic through a similar lens of resources and sovereignty, as it ramps up its military presence while intensifying efforts to extract natural resources. China’s influence in the region has steadily increased, as it collaborates with Russia, while advancing scientific research, sustainable development, and multilateral climate cooperation. The United States has come to see increasing Russia–China collaboration in the Arctic as a threat to U.S. national interests. But rather than responding to this deepening relationship through unilateralism, the U.S. should recognize that competitive coexistence and trilateral cooperation are more beneficial. This approach avoids zero-sum confrontation and minimizes accidental escalation while maintaining U.S. force projection, maximizing resource extraction, and promoting scientific collaboration. Toward this end, this brief recommends that the Trump administration: Establish trilateral maritime safety and search-and-rescue, SAR, operations, a system that exchanges real-time information, conducts joint training exercises, and invests in port and coast guard infrastructure. Such cooperation would lower shipping costs, improve safety, and encourage economic development — goals shared by the United States, Russia, and China. Institutionalize direct, reliable U.S.–Russia–China communication channels, including a dedicated Arctic hotline for incident reporting and a security digital platform for real-time vessel tracking. Such transparency minimizes the chances of miscalculation, particularly with nuclear assets in the region. Revitalize the Arctic Council to enable communication among the three major powers, the eight Arctic states, and Indigenous representatives. Initiate a trilateral arms control framework, using reductions in Arctic military exercises as a springboard for broader arms control and security arrangements.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Strategic Competition, and Great Powers
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, North America, Arctic, and United States of America

9. Prospects and Problems for Reinvigorating Superpower Nuclear Cooperation

Author:
Ariel Petrovics
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
A three-way nuclear arms race between the United States, China, and Russia looms — an escalation that would erode global nonproliferation and usher in an era of unchecked nuclear proliferation. This brief offers a path to preventing this destabilizing outcome through pragmatic nuclear cooperation — an approach that has strong historical precedent and accords with the strategic interests of all three nuclear superpowers. Superpower cooperation historically underpinned the global nuclear nonproliferation regime, but increasing great power competition erodes this entire system of international security. China and Russia have each modernized and expanded their nuclear programs and adopted more aggressive nuclear postures. The United States, in turn, has approved a nearly $2 trillion nuclear modernization program. This burgeoning arms race heightens risks of inadvertent escalation, as each of the superpowers become increasingly reliant on nuclear brinkmanship to hold off the growing capabilities of their adversaries. The deteriorating nuclear security environment places pressure on other states to similarly seek their own nuclear arsenals while weakening the nonproliferation tool kit that previously prevented these states from breaking out. As more armed states join the fray, they in turn multiply the number of potential nuclear flashpoints around the world. Reinvesting in superpower cooperation on nuclear security is not an idealistic bid for goodwill. Rather, halting unchecked competition is a pragmatic strategy that serves the interests of the United States, Russia, and China. It preserves a global nuclear system that has safeguarded the superpowers’ dominance for decades. Weakening it, on the other hand, undermines the international marketplace that has preserved U.S. dominance in private industry and innovation. Russia and China, in turn, risk a multifront nuclear competition, as proximate U.S. allies choose uncontrolled independent arsenals over existing security umbrellas. The superpowers can still step back from the abyss by reviving nuclear cooperation. Toward that objective, this brief recommends that the Trump administration: Accept Russia’s offer to extend New START for a year, paired with verification pathways and transparency measures. Reinvigorate existing direct lines of communication (i.e., hotline systems) with both Russia and China. Initiate trilateral nuclear discussions with Russia and China toward the goal of capping arsenals at parity on specific warheads and delivery systems.
Topic:
Security, International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, Nonproliferation, and Great Powers
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and United States of America

10. Understanding Global South Perspectives on Taiwan

Author:
Henrietta Levin and Hugh Grant-Chapman
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
To develop a better understanding of Global South perspectives on cross-Strait dynamics and Taiwan’s engagement with the developing world, the CSIS Freeman Chair in China Studies convened an international task force consisting of 20 leading scholars and practitioners from Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. Over the course of four workshops, task force members analyzed the increasing support that many Global South countries have offered for Beijing’s position on Taiwan, and how U.S. policy affects the position of Global South countries. They also considered opportunities for Taiwan to enhance its economic, diplomatic, and people-to-people engagement across the Global South. This brief summarizes the key takeaways from the task force’s deliberations.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Global South, and Strategic Engagement
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, and Global South

11. Europe Needs an ASAP Program for Air Defense

Author:
Max Bergmann, Otto Svendsen, and Jonathan Burchell
Publication Date:
03-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
Operation Epic Fury, the ongoing U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran, is consuming vast quantities of air defense interceptors—expensive munitions that were already in critically short supply before the operation was launched. European countries depend heavily on U.S.-produced air defense systems and munitions for their own defense and for protecting Ukraine. During the winter, Russian missiles and drones bombarded Ukrainian forces, as well as its cities and energy infrastructure, making air defense munitions vital to Ukraine’s survival. Europe now faces a looming crisis: The U.S.-made interceptors it needs, both for Ukraine today and for its own rearmament against Russia, may simply not be available. In response, European states should launch a crash program to rapidly expand production of European-made air defense systems and interceptors. Modeled on the European Union’s 2023 Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP), a new “ASAP for Air Defense” would channel EU funds into European munitions and systems—such as the IRIS-T, SAMP/T, and NASAMS systems—to reduce dependence on U.S. suppliers for the medium-range and cruise missile defense systems where European alternatives exist.
Topic:
International Security, Geopolitics, Russia-Ukraine War, and Air Defense
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

12. Deepening Strategic Alignment: Priorities for the U.S.-Japan Alliance

Author:
Kristi Govella and Nicholas Szechenyi
Publication Date:
04-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
With new leadership in both countries, Japan and the United States are facing an increasingly uncertain global environment. As Japan prepares to revise its core national strategy documents, it is a particularly important time for Tokyo and Washington to deepen their strategic alignment. Although bilateral cooperation continues to proceed relatively smoothly at the operational level, there is a pressing need to articulate a strategic vision to guide alliance priorities and facilitate effective implementation of common objectives.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Alliance, and Strategic Partnerships
Political Geography:
Japan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

13. Monitoring Demilitarised Zones in the Age of Uncrewed and AI Systems: Lessons from the Korean DMZ

Author:
Michael M. Bosack
Publication Date:
04-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP)
Abstract:
Demilitarised zones (DMZs) have demonstrated their utility in post-war peace processes. They separate forces, mitigating the risk of deliberate aggression or accidental incidents alike. However, the effective monitoring of DMZs can be challenging, because they tend to cover wide areas, sometimes with dangerous terrain replete with human-made and natural hazards. As such, parties responsible for monitoring DMZs rely on a passive posture where they simply respond to reported incidents, an active posture using personnel or technology wherever resources and the terrain will allow, or a combination of the two. With continued advances in uncrewed systems and artificial intelligence (AI), there are now ever-increasing calls for the employment of these technologies in DMZ monitoring functions. This is true of the Korean DMZ, a 240 km-long, 4 km-wide swathe of land that bifurcates the Korean Peninsula between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (or North Korea) and the Republic of Korea (or South Korea). In this area, the South Korean government is seeking to enhance its monitoring capabilities by using uncrewed and AI-based systems. In theory, there are many benefits to this approach, but in practice, policymakers and practitioners must address five inter-related dilemmas to ensure that these technologies actually support peace implementation instead of contributing to unintended conflict and tension. The problems associated with these dilemmas are not insurmountable, but they require deliberate steps and conscious implementation to maximise the opportunities that modern technologies provide while mitigating their risks. The lessons from the Korean DMZ are applicable in any post-war demilitarized zone, including the one envisioned between Russia and Ukraine. This Policy Brief proceeds as follows. It first outlines the function of DMZs in post-war environments and the practical challenges associated with monitoring them. It then examines the potential advantages that uncrewed and AI-enabled systems offer in addressing these challenges. Next, it assesses the implications of five inter-related policy dilemmas – legal, moral, technological, practical, and security – that arise from introducing such systems into DMZ contexts. This analytical framework is then applied to the Korean DMZ as a contemporary case study. Finally, policy recommendations are advanced aimed at ensuring that the use of emerging technologies strengthens, rather than undermines, peace implementation and long-term stability in DMZs.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Post-Conflict, and Demilitarized Zones (DMZs)
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and North Korea

14. Managing the Transatlantic Relationship in the Absence of US Leadership: Understanding the Trump Administration’s National Security Strategy

Author:
Paul Fritch
Publication Date:
03-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP)
Abstract:
The Trump administration’s December 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) represents a radical shift in US foreign policy, involving a move from global leadership of a rules-based international order to unabashed nationalism and regional hegemony. The new strategy no longer views the country’s sprawling network of alliances and partnerships and its ability to attract and integrate high-level talent from around the world as unique strengths, but rather as vulnerabilities to be mitigated. However, as jarring as these substantive changes are, the document’s structural changes and the irregular process that produced it may prove more significant in demonstrating just how sharply Washington is turning away from 80 years of bipartisan foreign policy consensus. The change is evident not just in the Trump administration’s policies, but – crucially – in the decision-making process that produces them. The new NSS is best understood as the formalisation of the administration’s abandonment of traditional policy coordination and strategic planning itself, an effort that has included the removal of senior career diplomats, military commanders, and intelligence officers; the systematic dismissal of senior judge advocates general and inspectors general; and the firing of many National Security Council (NSC) staff. The collective result of these steps, which find their natural culmination in the NSS and the National Defense Strategy (NDS) that followed in January 2026, is a policymaking process that is less informed by objective intelligence and analysis, less constrained by legal and policy advice or alliance consultation, and thus more subject to impulsiveness and ideological influence. Both of these developments – a new “America First” nationalism that eschews multilateral constraints and an erratic decision-making process that produces unpredictable and often impracticable outcomes – require a fundamental assessment by the country’s partners of their approach to the United States, both bilaterally and within established multilateral frameworks. This Policy Brief examines the practical implications of the 2025 NSS and the dramatically changed decision-making process it represents. For transatlantic allies and other middle powers, the central question is no longer whether US strategy has changed, but how to operate effectively in an environment of reduced predictability and diminished US strategic anchoring.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, Transatlantic Relations, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

15. The ramifications of aid cuts on refugee lives: case of the Differentiated Assistance (DA) model and the Shirika Plan in Kenya

Author:
Fred Ikanda and Michael Owiso
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
International support has failed to keep pace with the growing numbers of refugees and internally displaced persons, thus creating a financing gap between their needs and available resources. The recent US withdrawal from funding development and humanitarian programs has only compounded this financing gap which has existed for more than a decade. In response to this, the international community – through Agenda 2030, the Grand Bargain, the 2016 New York Declaration, and the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework (CRRF) – has advocated for a shift from seeing refugees as emergencies to integrating them into the host countries' developmental agenda. In Kenya, these policy proposals are most recently being implemented through the Shirika Plan, the Differentiated Assistance (DA) model, and development plans of refugee-hosting counties such as Turkana and Garissa. First, the Shirika Plan is a government-led initiative that was proclaimed in 2023 to realize the socio-economic inclusion of refugees within the local context in line with the progressive provisions of the Refugee Act of 2021. Implementation of this policy is yet to begin as it is pegged on elusive donor funding. Second, the DA model is led by the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the World Food Program (WFP) and is aligned with the Shirika Plan. The preparatory activities for DA were undertaken throughout 2024 and implementation commenced in August 2025. DA seeks to increase refugee self-reliance through livelihood interventions and providing support based on the specific needs and capabilities of different refugee households as opposed to the previous blanket support that was based on refugee registration status. However, implementation has so far only focused on reducing aid, without corresponding investment in self-reliance measures. DA and the Shirika Plan are framed in government and international circles as solutions for addressing funding shortfalls and fostering refugee integration by supporting self-reliance. However, there has been little progress in enhancing refugee self-reliance. At the same time, aid cuts are implemented based on a needs-categorisation of refugee households that proceeds without adequate background information. The lack of alternative livelihoods has exacerbated vulnerabilities and has sparked protests in refugee camps. Emerging evidence points to negative coping mechanisms, including higher school drop-out rates; reported cases of youths joining criminal religious groups; increased conflicts at family level; and rising cases of women becoming sex workers. This Policy Brief highlights the emerging ramifications of implementing DA that is anchored in the provisions contained in the Shirika Plan. The Brief also goes further to suggest recommendations for action to the government of Kenya and the international community. Key policy messages: • There is a need to enhance synergy between UNHCR and the Kenyan government such that the state implements the Shirika Plan alongside DA without premising its implementation on donor aid. • UNHCR needs to obtain more extensive household economic data and involve refugees in deciding who is most vulnerable to more accurately disaggregate refugee households into appropriate categories. • The Kenyan government and international actors need to closely monitor and address potential negative implications of implementing DA and the Shirika Plan.
Topic:
Development, Refugees, Displacement, Donors, UNHCR, and Aid Cuts
Political Geography:
Kenya and Africa

16. Beyond projects: the role of development partners in institutionalizing renewable energy innovations: lessons from the Global South

Author:
Lea Elsässer, Harald Fuhr, Anna Fünfgeld, Markus Lederer, Aparajita Banerjee, and HyunAh Yi
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Renewable energy has seen rapid uptake, particularly in the Global South. Solar energy projects have boomed in recent years, but uptake by countries is uneven. Beyond geophysical conditions, technological innovation, market dynamics and donor-driven “lighthouse projects”, political institutionalization has played a critical role in decarbonization. In this policy brief, which is based on extensive research from Global South case studies, we argue that political institutionalization is key to determining whether and how innovative solar initiatives become stabilized, scaled up, and mainstreamed. Drawing on the research project Institutionalizing Low Carbon Development in the Global South (INLOCADE) and expert contributions from a follow-up IDOS workshop, this policy brief synthesizes comparative policy-relevant findings on how institutionalization unfolds in various emerging economies of the Global South, including Brazil, Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia and South Africa. Key messages: • Political institutionalization – understood here as an enduring change of formal and informal rules and practices towards low-carbon development – ​​is essential for making renewable energy projects sustainable by embedding them in conducive, stable governance frameworks. Isolated, donor-driven initiatives are at risk of provoking resistance and backlash, and of fading away once external support ends. • Multiple pathways for institutionalization exist. State leadership, subnational action, alliances between development partners and communities, and crisis-driven coalitions can enable institutionalization under different conditions. Policies should be tailored to the institutional realities of each context rather than using one-size-fits-all models. Similarly, development partners should assess local realities and adapt their strategies accordingly. • Distributive justice and participation must be actively supported. Political institutionalization can lead to inequitable outcomes and reinforce exclusionary practices. Development partners should take a proactive role by aligning their interventions with inclusive and equitable approaches to ensure support for marginalized groups leads to socially just transitions, not just box-ticking. • Crises can be opportunities. Energy shortages and climate shocks can disrupt fossil-fuel lock-ins and open the door to innovation. Development partners need flexible instruments and strategies to help translate crisis-driven experiments into durable institutional change. • Development partners are catalytic, not deci-sive. They can accelerate change by providing finance, technical expertise, and legitimacy, especially when working with domestic actors beyond national governments. German and EU development cooperation should place greater emphasis on strengthening domestic institutional environments, including regulatory stability, administrative capacity, and actor coalitions that embed projects in lasting policy and organizational change. This helps ensure donor interventions contribute to sustained low-carbon transitions beyond initial project cycles.
Topic:
Development, Global South, Innovation, and Renewable Energy
Political Geography:
Bangladesh, Indonesia, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Cambodia

17. Building social cohesion through livelihood support in climate-related internal displacement settings: evidence from Zimbabwe and Mozambique

Author:
Tomy Ncube and Susan S. Ekoh
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Climate-related extreme weather events are increasingly displacing communities across Southern Africa, with negative implications for social cohesion, livelihoods, and community resilience. Understanding how displacement erodes social cohesion is important for developing strategies for restoring it. Evidence shows that livelihood support interventions, for example, cash‑based assistance, in-kind transfers (agricultural inputs) up to skills development programs, are a pathway for mending or strengthening social cohesion in displacement contexts. Yet, in some cases, they can further fragment it. This requires strategies under which such interventions can be deployed to positively shape social cohesion outcomes. This Policy Brief synthesizes insights from qualitative research conducted from 2023 to 2025 with displaced communities and host populations in Zimbabwe (Chimanimani and Tsholotsho districts) and Mozambique (Guara Guara, Grudja and Praia Nova). It examines how livelihood interventions can either rebuild or further fragment social cohesion, identifies critical factors driving cohesion outcomes, and provides evidence-based recommendations for national governments, humanitarian actors, and development co-operation actors working in climate-displacement contexts across Southern Africa. In Zimbabwe, vertical social cohesion in displacement contexts is eroded by a lack of designated policies on displacement, leading to poor socioeconomic outcomes for displaced individuals; ad hoc recovery and reconstruction efforts that undermine durable solutions and long-term recovery; and a lack of accountability infrastructure that undermines trust in the government. In Mozambique, the slow implementation and unequal distribution of recovery interventions undermine cooperation between communities and the institutions involved in post-disaster recovery efforts. This has led to large-scale returns of people to high-risk areas. Drawing insights from both case studies, we provide key recommendations and conditions for implementing livelihood support to achieve social cohesion in climate-related displacement contexts. Key policy messages • Livelihood interventions can lead to maladaptation if not supported by strong governance mechanisms including policy frameworks and institutional coordination in planning and implementation. • People-centred, area-based approaches to livelihood programming that account for pre-displacement livelihoods and support post-displacement transitions, while benefiting both displaced populations and host communities, should be adopted. One-size-fits-all interventions risk undermining economic recovery and social cohesion. • Horizontal and vertical social cohesion indicators should be embedded in livelihood programs from the outset to assess the social impacts before and after implementation. • Inclusive, participatory decision-making in the delivery of livelihood support programs should be mandated to prevent exclusionary practices that erode trust in institutions.
Topic:
Climate Change, Social Cohesion, Internal Displacement, Economic Recovery, and Livelihoods
Political Geography:
Africa, Mozambique, and Zimbabwe

18. Back to the future: the Pact for the Mediterranean and the miracle of Euro-Mediterranean integration

Author:
Mark Furness
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The European Union (EU) and southern Mediterranean partners launched the Pact for the Mediterranean in November 2025 to reset relations with the EU's “Southern Neighborhood” in an increasingly challenging regional context. The Pact comes 30 years after the 1995 Barcelona Process promised to foster economic – and to a lesser degree political – integration in the Mediterranean Basin. The Pact's declared objective is to “achieve deeper integration within the common Mediterranean space” (EC & HR, 2025). This policy brief discusses the Pact's prospects for achieving this goal, which previous efforts have failed to achieve. For long-time observers of Euro-Mediterranean relations, the Pact appears to be a “back to the future” approach. Its three substantive “pillars” (people, economies and security) echo the three “baskets” (political/security, economic and socio-cultural) of the original Euro-Mediterranean Partnership. Structurally, it relies on the same mix of differentiated bilateral agreements (now termed “comprehensive partnerships”) within a multilateral regional framework. The Pact's success depends on whether the EU and Mediterranean partner countries can resolve four core dilemmas that have long challenged their relations: • The “autocracy dilemma”: balancing the need to work with authoritarian governments with European interests in supporting democracy. • The “migration dilemma”: securing borders while respecting human rights. • The “rentierism dilemma”: finding solutions to immediate economic, social and environmental challenges while making necessary reforms to rentier political economies. • The “regionalism dilemma”: cutting bilateral deals while trying to build regional structures to address collective action problems. The term “pact” is normally used to describe an agreement between two partners, setting out agreed objectives and actions for both sides. The Pact for the Mediterranean is an EU policy framework that, at most, represents a tacit agreement with southern Mediterranean governments, without committing either side to policy changes or reforms that might have long-term implications. The Pact for the Mediterranean has potential to strengthen sectoral cooperation, for example on renewable energy, connectivity infrastructure and labor mobility. If accompanied by sufficient resources and mutual trust-building, this functional cooperation may create incentives for deeper integration. This, in turn, will still depend on whether the EU and southern Mediterranean governments can move beyond trans-actionalism and invest in partnerships between their societies: support for democratic movements and institutions, investment in public goods, protection of the natural environment and investment in collective regionalism. Thus far, there is little indication that the EU and southern Mediterranean governments will take advantage of this opportunity.
Topic:
Migration, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, Regional Integration, Autocracy, and Rentierism
Political Geography:
Europe and Mediterranean

19. Digital labor opportunities and (im)mobility: steps for making digital remote work a global possibility

Author:
Charles Martin-Shields
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This policy brief offers advice for making digital remote work a viable solution to fill labor gaps without requiring workers to physically relocate. From a technology standpoint, there is no reason someone who does computer-based work must physically relocate, assuming they have the required job skills and internet connectivity. The increased use of bilateral labor agreements (BLAs) between countries is evidence that there are major skills gaps and global competition for labor. Indeed, a BLA can serve as a “policy sandbox” where governments negotiate the legal and statutory terms of digital remote work. Digital remote work can be an especially useful solution when the country providing labor has a large pool of people who are willing to work and fill labor pool gaps in countries of employment, but for different legal or personal reasons cannot relocate across borders. This latter point is no small thing: there is a significant body of migration research showing that the majority of people are not interested in moving across borders – or in the case of many refugees are unable to do so. The reasons for this are myriad. Digital labor could be a workaround to meet basic labor demand and facilitate economic inclusion. The word “could” is critical because banking, social and health insurance, and taxation, all of which are components of legal employment, remain bordered. This policy brief will focus on a specific case from research on urban refugee livelihoods where the worker was able to work digitally in the US from Malaysia, while being subject to social security, taxation and insurance in the US The idiosyncrasies in this case help point to spaces for reforming social security, tax and insurance rules to reduce their “bordered-ness” and make digital work more systematically viable. Key policy messages: • To make digital remote work viable at scale, development cooperation agencies should play a key facilitator role, linking relevant authorities in the tax, social insurance and banking regulation sectors. This is especially important for refugees who often cannot move and who fall outside the protection of host country labor laws. These reforms could, for example, be built into BLAs. • Achieving inclusive economic development goals via digital employment would require that remote workers earn competitive salaries. Thus, there would need to be buy-in from the private sector regarding wage competitiveness for workers in different countries, as well as a role for unions and civil society in negotiating digital remote work policy. • While digital work can enable greater economic and labor participation for workers who cannot relocate for jobs, there are still sectors that require physical presence. Thus, digital remote work is not a replacement for immigration policy that facilitates safe and flexible migration for those people who do have to move.
Topic:
Development, Labor Issues, Employment, Remote Work, and Digital Employment
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Strengthening European development policy: the case for Team Europe 2.0

Author:
Svea Koch, Julian Bergmann, Benedikt Erforth, Christine Hackenesch, and Niels Keijzer
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The international order is undergoing profound change as rivalry among major powers realigns the global balance. This is also having an impact on European development policy. In many European Union (EU) member states, funding for official development assistance (ODA) is declining. At the same time, EU countries are reforming their development policies and increasingly channeling their remaining resources towards priorities that serve primarily their own interests. So far, these reforms have largely been defined bilaterally, whereas a political debate on the role, added value and joint objectives of EU development policy is largely absent. Yet, without strengthening European cooperation in development policy, Europe will not succeed in providing an adequate response to the current upheavals in global politics. In this policy brief, we argue that reform efforts in European development policy must strengthen co-operation and complementarity to respond effectively to the changed geopolitical landscape. Our analysis identifies four key policy areas where European actors are pursuing ongoing reforms and where development policy should make significant contributions: 1) promoting economic cooperation and private-sector engagement, 2) security policy, 3) managing and shaping migration and 4) human development including poverty reduction, particularly in least developed countries (LDCs). So far, a joint European strategic direction in these areas has been lacking. Negotiating these shared priorities requires a revitalization of the political dialogue between EU institutions and member states, as well as further development of the “Team Europe” approach. “Team Europe 2.0” would then have two functions: to strengthen substantive complementarity “internally” through an understanding of how the various actors individually contribute to jointly defined objectives; and “externally” by making visible what Europe stands for strategically. A key element of Team Europe 2.0 should be an improved substantive dialogue among member states and within issue-specific, informal groups co-facilitated by individual member states and the European Commission. Such “thematic champions” could initiate the development of joint strategies for larger, transformative initiatives. Improved political dialogue and coordination on substance in key areas of European development policy are prerequisites for a united and more strategic external presence of “Team Europe”, including in multilateral contexts.
Topic:
Development, Reform, European Union, Economic Cooperation, Human Development, Rivalry, and International Order
Political Geography:
Europe