Search

Begin New Search Topic Governance Political Geography Global Focus Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

1. Disentangling Government Responses: How Do We Know When Accountability Work Is Gaining Traction?

Author:
Jonathan Fox, Brendan Halloran, Alta Fölscher, and Rosie McGee
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Advocacy for public accountability aims to produce certain reactions from government officials or service providers. However, the reactions can be many and diverse, and it is not always clear to advocates how to interpret them and decide on next steps—whether to intensify efforts or back off; continue the same strategy or make adjustments. This paper presents a framework to help accountability advocates and practitioners interpret government reactions to their efforts and move forward appropriately. The framework arises from learning and reflection in the context of the International Budget Partnership (IBP)’s Strengthening Public Accountability with Results and Knowledge (SPARK) program. SPARK seeks to bolster the collective agency of marginalized communities and coalitions to advance democratic and equitable fiscal governance systems that channel public resources to services that address the priority needs of these historically excluded groups.
Topic:
Government, Governance, Accountability, and Financial Management
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Mitigating Global Fragmentation in Digital Trade Governance: A Case Study

Author:
Douglas Lippoldt
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Digital trade is growing rapidly, and regulators are trying to keep up. Concerns about privacy, consumer protection and national security demand regulatory attention, but too much regulation risks stifling digital trade. Current-generation trade agreements need to find the right balance between regulatory and liberal approaches to e-commerce. This paper looks at how five leading digital economies (Canada, the European Union, Japan, Singapore and the United States) are using regional trade agreements to address concerns while enhancing trade.
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Governance, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Could a Global “Wicked Problems Agency” Incentivize Data Sharing?

Author:
Susan Ariel Aaronson
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Global data sharing could help solve “wicked” problems (problems such as climate change, terrorism and global poverty that no one knows how to solve without creating further problems). There is no one or best way to address wicked problems because they have many different causes and manifest in different contexts. By mixing vast troves of data, policy makers and researchers may find new insights and strategies to address these complex problems. National and international government agencies and large corporations generally control the use of such data, and the world has made little progress in encouraging cross-sectoral and international data sharing. This paper proposes a new international cloud-based organization, the "Wicked Problems Agency," to catalyze both data sharing and data analysis in the interest of mitigating wicked problems. This organization would work to prod societal entities — firms, individuals, civil society groups and governments — to share and analyze various types of data. The Wicked Problems Agency could provide a practical example of how data sharing can yield both economic and public good benefits.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Governance, Data, and Public-Private Partnership
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Section 232 reloaded: the false promise of the transatlantic ‘climate club’ for steel and aluminium

Author:
David Kleimann
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
In using the removal of Section 232 ‘national security’ tariffs on steel and aluminium imports as a bargaining chip, the United States demands that the European Union engage in negotiations on “global steel and aluminium arrangements to restore market-oriented conditions and address carbon intensity”. The US demand has reportedly been inspired by a blueprint that would establish an international institutional arrangement – labelled a ‘climate club’ – which would externalise market-access restrictions afforded by US Section 232 tariffs to the customs borders of club members. While the declared objective is to incentivise non-members to adopt low-carbon steel (and aluminium) production methods the US blueprint suffers from various design flaws including inefficient incentives, WTO inconsistency and incompatibility with the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. The effectiveness of the proposed US scheme is severely compromised by the plethora of policy objectives it pursues, which go far beyond the goal of incentivising industrial decarbonisation in third countries, including secondary (ie protectionism) and tertiary (ie global power competition with China) objectives. The initial negotiation proposal submitted by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to European Commission trade negotiators incorporates many if not all the problematic elements of this blueprint, setting the US on a collision course with the negotiation proposal put forward by the European Commission. This paper concludes that the adoption of the scheme proposed by USTR would result in a step backwards for international climate and trade cooperation, whereas not adopting the EU proposal would make for a missed opportunity. Given the sharply diverging negotiation positions and associated respective domestic constraints on both sides, however, policymakers should start to engage stakeholders now to manage expectations towards a low-ambition negotiation result, if any.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Industrial Policy, Governance, European Union, Economy, Trade Policy, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Emergent Agency in a Time of COVID-19: Research report

Author:
Flippo Artuso, Katrina Barnes, Duncan Green, and Irene Guijt
Publication Date:
02-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented event in the modern era. Earlier studies demonstrated how ‘critical junctures’, which comprise major historical events and emergencies, often play an essential role in social change. This paper seeks to explore whether the COVID-19 pandemic would prove to be a similar pivotal moment, and what lessons and insights we could gather for positive social change. The research set out to find key insights on how individuals, communities, and organizations in civil society were responding to the pandemic in low-income populations at the intersection of multiple inequalities. These lessons could inform how donors, governments and NGOs might reshape their efforts to reduce emerging or deepening inequalities, and how civil society organisations and community-based organisations could amplify their positive impacts. Over 18 months, from September 2020 to March 2022, the ‘Emergent Agency’ research convened a global conversation between activists, development practitioners, researchers, and academics to better understand the phenomena that were taking place in response to the pandemic. The research collected more than 200 case studies and held a series of webinars and conversations in thematic clusters to uncover what these responses could teach us. The research project was enabled with funding from The Atlantic Fellows for Social and Economic Equity programme (AFSEE) of the London School of Economics.
Topic:
Civil Society, Governance, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. The Technology of Terror: from Dynamite to the Metaverse

Author:
Christina Schori Liang
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Non-state actors have always been interested in obtaining and mastering innovative weapons. According to “lethal empowerment theory”, new technologies will be rapidly adopted and adapted by violent non-state actors when they are accessible, cheap, simple to use, transportable, concealable, and effective. Terrorists are interested in weapons that are useful in a wide range of contexts – “that magnify effects, are symbolically resonant and can be given to unexpected uses.” It is thus important to be vigilant in analysing how actors will leverage and innovate new technologies for malicious purposes, in order to confront the “unknown unknowns” and not repeat the mistakes based on a “failure of imagination”, as highlighted in the 9/11 Commission Report.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Terrorism, Governance, Social Media, and Innovation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. A Future Built on Data: Data Strategies, Competitive Advantage and Trust

Author:
Susal Ariel Aarsonson
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
In the twenty-first century, data became the subject of national strategy. This paper examines these visions and strategies to better understand what policy makers hope to achieve. Data is different from other inputs: it is plentiful, easy to use and can be utilized and shared by many different people without being used up. Moreover, data can be simultaneously a commercial asset and a public good. Various types of data can be analyzed to create new products and services or to mitigate complex “wicked” problems that transcend generations and nations (a public good function). However, an economy built on data analysis also brings problems — firms and governments can manipulate or misuse personal data, and in so doing undermine human autonomy and human rights. Given the complicated nature of data and its various types (for example, personal, proprietary, public, and so on), a growing number of governments have decided to outline how they see data’s role in the economy and polity. While it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies, policy makers increasingly recognize that if they want to build their country’s future on data, they must also focus on trust.
Topic:
Economics, Governance, Data, and Competition
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Governance for Resilience: How Can States Prepare for the Next Crisis?

Author:
Frances Brown
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The pandemic has presented policymakers with daunting, interlinked, and often unprecedented challenges. From health emergencies that also upend economies to trade disruptions that also pose new multilateral diplomatic dilemmas, the pandemic has generated challenges that seem exceptional in both scale and degree of interconnection. Although the coronavirus pandemic has generated a dizzying series of harsh social, political, and economic firsts, such dilemmas will not be the last. Trend lines around a series of domestic and multinational governance issues, including climate change, migration, rising geopolitical tensions, and citizen alienation from governing institutions, suggest that complex, interlinked crises will be features of the future. While national and multilateral policymakers should work to alleviate the drivers of such crises, they must also strive to prepare their countries to adapt and recover from complex shocks. In short, they must try to build resilience. The need for resilience will be especially acute in developing and fragile states. These countries will need to respond to compounding shocks across multiple domains, without the head start that their developed-world counterparts enjoy. Equally, donors and policymakers from the Global North must also elevate resilience and adaptation as key components of their approaches to supporting fragile states. This call to bolster countries’ resilience is hardly new. Even before the pandemic, the policy arena featured increasing calls for resilience; now, the chorus has become almost deafening. Recent seminal policy and analytic documents—including the U.S. National Intelligence Council’s flagship report,1 the UK’s Integrated Review,2 and the U.S. Interim National Security Strategy3—have underscored that states’ resilience and capacity for adaptation will be key to their future success in the geopolitical arena. In donors’ peacebuilding and development policies, high-level emphasis on resilience has also swelled over the past few years, including in official communications from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,4 the United States government,5 and the European Union.6 In some development practitioner and civil society circles, the need for resilience is so frequently invoked that it sometimes borders on cliché.7 The increasingly ubiquitous recommendation to “bolster resilience” is valuable for at least two related reasons. First, it offers a more specific strategic objective than conversations around “state fragility” writ large, which have often been too broad to generate concrete policy responses. Second, recent, failed international statebuilding projects have underscored that state fragility is not to be “fixed”—instead, it is to be managed and mitigated.8 The emphasis on resilience thus marks a helpful shift away from maximalist policy framing and toward a more attainable one. But concrete insights on how developing or fragile countries actually achieve resilience are less clear and less common. Given the broad consensus that state fragility is deeply linked to governance, for many policymakers, good governance is central. To be sure, many other factors beyond governance—including demographic, geographic, military, and economic ones—affect a state’s resilience. But a country’s governance and political institutions generally undergird all other dynamics in determining how effectively that state can bounce back from setbacks. What exactly does the concept of “good governance for resilience” entail in practice? This paper surveys the evidence. Below, it reviews the governance-related characteristics and capabilities that affect a country’s resilience. For the purposes of this paper, resilience at the national level can be understood as a country’s capacity to respond to, adapt to, and grow from stresses and shocks.9 Resilience focuses on bolstering the overall performance of a system in the face of unpredictable and often interconnected hazards, making it different from risk management, which relates to specific hazards.10 A country’s resilience depends on the internal characteristics that allow for states and their institutions to navigate a variety of disruptions.11 An overarching insight from the evidence is that governance for resilience is complex and often multidirectional. Several characteristics, such as decentralization, have an ambiguous effect on resilience: they enable a country to withstand some setbacks but leave it more vulnerable in other ways. Still other characteristics—including whether a country is a democracy or an authoritarian political system—do not appear have a clear-cut effect on resilience. In contrast, a few governance “super-factors”—such as control of corruption, societal trust, and high quality political leadership—are exceptionally powerful in enabling a country to augment its resilience through multiple pathways. Finally, this paper considers the broader implications of governance for resilience as a policy agenda. The framing of bolstering countries’ resilience is a valuable one, but it also raises several vexing trade-offs and dilemmas. In particular, it prompts the question of whose resilience, in specific, it refers to, since resilience of state institutions does not always mean resilience of all parts of the population. Looking ahead, the policy refrain of “building resilience” in fragile and developing states, appealing though it is, should be refined to encompass these thorny realities.
Topic:
Governance, Crisis Management, Resilience, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Government Deficits and Interest Rates: A Keynesian View

Author:
Brett Palatiello and Philip Pilkington
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
We test the neoclassical loanable funds model which postulates that, ceteris paribus, government borrowing increases the long-term rate of interest. The empirical literature exploring such a connection remains largely mixed. We clarify the conflicting results by deploying an ARDL model to decompose the relationship in the United States into long and short-run effects across multiple measures of the government deficit and long-term interest rate. We find a tendency for changes in the deficit to increase long-term interest rates in the short run but the effect is reversed in the long run. We argue that these results are consistent with John Maynard Keynes’ view of the long-term rate as being heavily influenced by monetary policy, central bank credibility and market convention.
Topic:
Economics, Governance, Economic Theory, Keynes, and Deficit
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. Public policy actors view success differently, and it matters

Author:
Matt Andrews
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University
Abstract:
Literature tells us there are many dimensions of public policy success, and different actors in the policy process will likely focus on different dimensions. This paper asks how different actors in the policy process view policy success, and how much their views differ. It finds evidence that actors devising policy plans— designers—view success narrowly, as achieving near-term, programmed goals; whereas other actors involved in advocating for, authorizing, and implementing policies have a broader success perspective, paying more attention to non-program criteria like long-term impact, distributional and endurance success, and intertemporal gains that manifest in the way policies grow capability, political support, stakeholder satisfaction, and process legitimacy. Such finding raises a question about how policy objectives are determined when actors disagree, given that literature also tells us that policies are more likely to succeed when actors agree on what success is and how to achieve it.
Topic:
Government, Governance, and Public Policy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

11. Putting Development at the Centre of G20 Policy Agenda: Lessons for the T20

Author:
Daniele Fattibene and Alice Fill
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The G20 Development Working Group has gradually evolved throughout the years, following a haphazard and contradictory path. On the one hand, it has been progressively overshadowed by a sectoralisation of G20 activities, with several action tracks (i.e., the Finance Track) taking a more prominent role in the definition of the leaders’ priorities. On the other hand, its (unexploited) potential has increased due to the emergence of several global crises that have shown the importance of rekindling multilateral solutions at the G20 level. The T20 has a strong potential to boost G20 legitimacy on development cooperation worldwide, by drafting evidence-based and pragmatic policy proposals for the decision-makers. However, although often advocating for similar solutions, the Development Working Group and T20 have not necessarily fed into each other’s policy agendas, leading to misalignment and reducing their chances to influence other G20 tracks on crucial development issues such as development finance, food security or the global climate agenda.
Topic:
Development, Political Economy, Governance, G20, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. A model to explain the impact of government revenue on the quality of governance and the SDGs

Author:
Stephen G. Hall and Bernadette O'Hare
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
United Nations University
Abstract:
This paper empirically investigates the link between the level of government revenue per capita and six indicators of quality of governance in an unbalanced panel data set consisting of all countries in the world (217) using data from 1980 to 2020. It uses single-equation GMM techniques and a VAR and VECM approach to investigate this link. The results show a strong effect over time whereby an increase in government revenue leads to a steady improvement in governance. These findings suggest an important virtuous circle between government revenue and governance, indicating that additional government revenue can significantly impact the Sustainable Development Goals more than our previous work has suggested.
Topic:
Corruption, Governance, and Sustainable Development Goals
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. How Can Multilateral Organizations Strengthen Global Data Governance Practices? Roundtable Summary

Author:
Michael Pisa and Ugonma Nwankwo
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This brief is based on a roundtable hosted by CGD as part of the Governing Data for Development project, which explores how governments can use data to support innovation, development, and inclusive growth while protecting citizens and communities against harm. The views expressed here are those of the participants and do not necessarily represent the views of CGD staff. For other briefs in the series, as well as more on the project, visit cgdev.org/governing-data. Cross-border data flows are governed through a patchwork of complex, overlapping arrangements and trade agreements. The absence of a more systematic approach to data governance at the global level may make it harder for low- and middle-income countries to participate in the global digital economy and develop their own frameworks for governing the use of data in a responsible manner. It also leaves them with limited leverage in negotiations with both Big Tech companies and wealthier jurisdictions. This meeting is the third in a series of private roundtables convened by the Center for Global Development aimed at exploring the relationship between data governance and economic development. The first event examined whether current approaches to data protection and privacy are a good fit for resource-constrained countries. The second explored whether evolving digital trade rules support or hinder economic development. This third roundtable explored the role and limitations of multilaterals in promoting better data governance. This document summarizes key takeaways from the meeting, including the remarks of four keynote speakers and themes raised in a discussion among 30 experts, who are listed in the appendix. The roundtable was moderated by Pam Dixon, founder and executive director of the World Privacy Forum, and co-chair of the working group for CGD’s Governing Data for Development project.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Governance, Digital Economy, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

14. Effective Humanitarian Governance

Author:
Patrick Saez, Jeremy Konyndyk, and Rose Worden
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This paper argues that humanitarian system reform should extend to governance. Governing institutions—such as member state boards of multilateral organizations, and NGO boards of directors—have tremendous influence over the strategic direction of individual institutions and the sector writ large. But governing bodies of humanitarian organizations and system-wide governance are exclusive, organizing power and influence around a few governments, organizations, and individuals. There are few entry points for aid agencies’ downstream clients, or for host governments with the willingness and capacity to take the lead in disaster response. Moving toward a sector where mission effectiveness is measured through partnerships rather than agency capabilities, and outcomes rather than fundraising totals, will depend on governance bodies that promote and monitor those priorities. This will require more direct representation of the views of communities affected by crises in governing bodies, in the relationships between donors and their partners, and in supporting national and local humanitarian governance in countries that have demonstrated their ability to lead the response to disasters impartially. Multistakeholder platforms at the global and country level should be established to align behind common needs assessments and policy directions, and to mobilize and align resources accordingly. Finally, assessing collective effectiveness should become an independent function systematically deployed alongside humanitarian operations, directly informing governing structures, donors, and the public.
Topic:
Governance, Institutions, NGOs, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. A quarter century of ‘The Proper Scope of Government’: Theory and Applications

Author:
Oliver Hart
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Abstract:
A quarter-century ago in a seminal paper, Hart, Shleifer, and Vishny (NBER1996, QJE1997) developed a theory of the ‘Proper Scope of Government.’ Oliver Hart, 2016 Nobel Laureate, reflects on that framework and its place in economics, as well as the inspiration for his more recent work on norms, guiding principles, and contracts as reference points. In discussion with Karen Eggleston, Hart answers questions posed by economists who have built upon Hart, Shleifer and Vishny (1997) and offers insights on how the theory applies to understanding public and private roles in healthcare, education, and other publicly-financed services.
Topic:
Education, Privatization, Political Theory, Governance, Health Care Policy, Social Services, and Public Service
Political Geography:
Global Focus

16. Trade and the Spatial Distribution of Transport Infrastructure

Author:
Gabriel Felbermayr and Alexander Tarasov
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
The distribution of transport infrastructure across space is the outcome of deliberate government planning that reflects a desire to unlock the welfare gains from regional economic integration. Yet, despite being one of the oldest government activities, the economic forces shaping the endogenous emergence of infrastructure have not been rigorously studied. This paper provides a stylized analytical framework of open economies in which planners decide non-cooperatively on transport infrastructure investments across continuous space. Allowing for intra- and international trade, the resulting equilibrium investment schedule features underinvestment that turns out particularly severe in border regions and that is amplified by the presence of discrete border costs. In European data, the mechanism explains about 16% of the border effect identified in a conventionally specified gravity regression.
Topic:
Economics, Infrastructure, Governance, Borders, and Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus

17. Populism and COVID19: How Populist Governments (Mis)Handle the Pandemic

Author:
Michael Bayerlein, Vanessa A. Boese, Scott Gates, Katrin Kamin, and S. Mansoob Murshed
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
Populist parties and actors now govern various countries around the world. Often elected by the public in times of crises and over the perceived failure of ‘the elites’, the question stands as to how populist governments actually perform once elected, especially in times of crisis. Using the pandemic shock in the form of the COVID-19 crises, our paper answers the question of how populist governments handle the pandemic. We answer this question by introducing a theoretical framework according to which populist governments (1) enact less far-reaching policy measures to counter the pandemic and (2) lower the effort of citizens to counter the pandemic, so that populist governed countries are (3) hit worse by the pandemic. We test these propositions in a sample of 42 countries with weekly data from 2020. Employing econometric models, we find empirical support for our propositions and ultimately conclude that excess mortality in populist governed countries exceeds the excess mortality of conventional countries by 10 percentage points (i.e., 100%). Our findings have important implications for the assessment of populist government performance in general, as well as counter-pandemic measures in particular, by providing evidence that opportunistic and inadequate policy responses, spreading misinformation and downplaying the pandemic are strongly related to increases in COVID-19 mortality.
Topic:
Governance, Populism, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. The Limits of Democracy

Author:
D. Eric Schansberg
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
There’s an old saying that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all of the others. Or putting it another way: the best form of government is a benevolent and knowledgeable dictator, except for the problem of finding a good and wise leader. Whatever democracy’s strengths, they are relative not absolute, and they are contingent on context—namely, the people being governed, the people governing, and the underlying institutions.
Topic:
Politics, Governance, Democracy, and Populism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

19. The Need for Local Governance of Global Commons: The Example of Blue Carbon Ecosystems

Author:
Christine Merk, Jonas Grunau, Marie-Catherine Riekhof, and Wilfried Rickels
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
To limit global warming to 1.5°C, vast amounts of CO2 will have to be removed from the atmosphere via Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR). Enhancing the CO2 sequestration of ecosystems will require not just one approach but a portfolio of CDR options, including so‐called nature‐based approaches alongside CDR options that are perceived as more technical. Creating a CDR “supply curve” would however imply that all carbon removals are considered to be perfect substitutes. The various co‐benefits of nature‐based CDR approaches militate against this. We discuss this aspect of nature‐based solutions in connection with the enhancement of blue carbon ecosystems (BCE) such as mangrove or seagrass habitats. Enhancing BCEs can indeed contribute to CO2 sequestration, but the value of their carbon storage is low compared to the overall contribution of their ecosystem services to wealth. Furthermore, their property rights are often unclear, i.e. not comprehensively defined or not enforced. Hence, payment schemes that only compensate BCE carbon sequestration could create tradeoffs at the expense of other important, often local, ecosystem services and might not result in socially optimal outcomes. Accordingly, one chance for preserving and restoring BCEs lies in the consideration of all services in potential compensation schemes for local communities. Also, local contexts, management structures, and benefit‐sharing rules are crucial factors to be considered when setting up international payment schemes to support the use of BCEs and other nature‐ or ecosystem‐based CDR. However, regarding these options as the only hope of achieving more CDR will very probably not bring about the desired outcome, either for climate mitigation or for ecosystem preservation. Unhalted degradation, in turn, will make matters worse due to the large amounts of stored carbon that would be released. Hence, countries committed to climate mitigation in line with the Paris targets should not hide behind vague pledges to enhance natural sinks for removing atmospheric CO2 but commit to scaling up engineered CDR.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, Governance, Global Warming, and Local
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Sovereign Bonds since Waterloo

Author:
Josefin Meyer and Christoph Trebesch
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
This paper studies external sovereign bonds as an asset class. We compile a new database of 266,000 monthly prices of foreign-currency government bonds traded in London and New York between 1815 (the Battle of Waterloo) and 2016, covering up to 91 countries. Our main insight is that, as in equity markets, the returns on external sovereign bonds have been sufficiently high to compensate for risk. Real ex-post returns average more than 6 percent annually across two centuries, including default episodes, major wars, and global crises. This represents an excess return of 3-4 percent above US or UK government bonds, which is comparable to stocks and outperforms corporate bonds. Central to this finding are the high average coupons offered on external sovereign bonds. The observed returns are hard to reconcile with canonical theoretical models and the degree of credit risk in this market, as measured by historical default and recovery rates. Based on our archive of more than 300 sovereign debt restructurings since 1815, we show that full repudiation is rare; the median creditor loss (haircut) is below 50 percent.
Topic:
Economics, Governance, Finance, and Bonds
Political Geography:
Global Focus