Search

Begin New Search Topic Governance Political Geography United States of America Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 3 Years Publication Year within 25 Years

1. The State of EU-US Digital and Energy Cooperation

Author:
Federica Marconi, Wolfgang Münchau, and Irene Paviotti
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In a time of rapid technological advancements and changing energy paradigms, the European Union and the United States are trying to coordinate their efforts to navigate the complexities of an ever-evolving landscape. Transatlantic dialogues and cooperative endeavours are key mechanisms for mitigating tensions and fostering a common assessment of the opportunities and risks arising from these advancements. Critical in this regard are the problems of governance emanating from technological development and its consequences in the digital sphere as well as the delicate balance between security, competitiveness and environmental targets in the energy dimension.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Political Economy, Governance, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, Digital Policy, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

2. Transatlantic Tech Bridge: Digital Infrastructure and Subsea Cables, a US Perspective

Author:
Julia Tréhu and Megan Roberts
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The importance of digital infrastructure for global communication and connectivity is only growing. Within this varied sector, subsea cables play a central role in ensuring seamless internet traffic globally. What are the US’s strategic and economic interests in digital infrastructure, particularly subsea cables? Within the context of larger economic and geopolitical competition, US policy is multifaceted, from aiming to secure the physical security of infrastructure and guarding against espionage and technology leakage, to boosting economic competitiveness and supporting domestic firms. Overall, digital infrastructure, and undersea cables in particular, are a key element of a larger US strategy of outcompeting China. Although evaluations among allies of the relative threat posed by China and Chinese-owned digital infrastructure vary, broadly shared goals of resiliency, security, and increased connectivity mean there are potential areas for deeper EU-US cooperation, including partnerships with third countries, that align with their respective strategic visions and represent a solid base for further transatlantic coordination.
Topic:
International Political Economy, Infrastructure, Governance, Transatlantic Relations, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. Mexico’s “Catch-22”: The Implications of Being a Trade and Climate Partner of the United States and the European Union

Author:
Simone Lucatello
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Under the current global environmental governance and trade regimes, several initiatives, such as the new United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, the European Union’s European Green Deal, and regional free trade agreements the European Union has implemented with strategic partners like Mexico, are prompting a vibrant discussion on how trade agreements can be used as a potential mechanism to create enforceable cross-border commitments to tackle climate change. However, to cut greenhouse gas emissions within a few decades, a decisive departure from current trends in emission and trade policies is required by all countries, both developed and developing. As a result, politicians, scholars and experts around the world have looked to trade agreements as a possible tool for reaching global climate commitments, either related to or independent from the Paris Agreement. But how well do these agreements suit this purpose? Carbon-intensive products worldwide increased when tariff reductions were implemented, resulting in destructive practices for many countries, particularly those in the Global South. For countries such as Mexico, the nexus between trade and climate change is not easy to address: the country is trapped between its ambitions to play a role in global trade platforms as an industrial manufacturer and agricultural exporter and its desire to be recognized as a global actor in climate change policy and actions within the global community. Despite recent changes in climate and environmental politics under the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (2018–2024), Mexico is a middle-income country with a long-standing tradition as climate champion and environmental leader in the Global South and needs to make clear where it stands under the new global environmental and ecological transition scenario imposed by the climate crisis and trade-related issues. The “entanglement” of global trade treaties and commitments under the current climate crisis, represents a major shift for Mexico. Caught between the new US–Mexico-Canada Agreement, the EU–Mexico Trade Agreement and the possible impacts of the European Green Deal, Mexico needs to define its role in trade and environmental terms alongside giant partners such as the United States and the European Union, while defending its role as a regional power. If the European Green Deal takes off as an international driver for deepening climate and sustainable development goals with European Union strategic partners, it remains to be seen how Mexico will respond to the challenge. In this paper we address the possible implications for Mexico under each of these instruments. We look at the interplay between them, explore the linkages and possible conflictual pathways, and “disentangle” the schemes in which trade and climate change are interconnected. Mexico may be trapped in a “catch-22” situation. Environmental provisions embedded in trade treaties provide critical benefits to the country, but this often comes at the expense of “unacceptable” environmental enforcement measures that can put at risk national development plans, especially at a time when the environment and climate change issues are not at the top of the current administration’s political agenda.
Topic:
Climate Change, Governance, European Union, Partnerships, Trade, and Green Deal
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

4. Houthi/Iranian attacks on UAE a response to losses on the Yemen battlefield

Author:
Jonathan Spyer
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Incensed by recent government gains in Yemen, the Iranians seek to intimidate the UAE into reversing course. At this juncture, it is therefore vital that both the US and Israel offer support for the UAE’s cause.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Military Strategy, Governance, Conflict, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Yemen, North America, United States of America, Gulf Nations, and UAE

5. How Inequality and Polarization Interact: America’s Challenges Through a South African Lens

Author:
Brian Levy
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Over the past decade, toxic interactions between persistent inequality, racial tensions, and political polarization have undercut the promise of South Africa’s so-called rainbow miracle transition from apartheid to democracy. South Africa’s recent history sheds light on the United States’ recent political travails. It illustrates how interactions between inclusion and inequality on the one hand and political ideas and entrepreneurship on the other can fuel positive spirals of hope, economic dynamism, and political legitimacy—but can also trigger vicious, downward spirals of disillusion, anger, and political polarization. South Africa was able to transition from a society structured around racial oppression into a nonracial democracy whose new government promised “a better life for all.” Especially remarkable was the speed with which one set of national ideas appeared to give way to its polar opposite. From a society marked by racial dominance and oppression, there emerged the aspiration to build an inclusive, cooperative social order, underpinned by the principles of equal dignity and shared citizenship. In the initial glow of transition, South Africa’s citizens could hope for a better life for themselves and their children. In time, though, the promise wore thin. It became increasingly evident that the economic deck would continue to be stacked, and that the possibility of upward mobility would remain quite limited. Fueled by massive continuing inequities in wealth, income, and opportunity, South Africans increasingly turned from hope to anger. In the United States, a steady and equitably growing economy and a vibrant civil rights movement had fostered the hope of social and economic inclusion. But that hope turned to anger as the benefits of growth became increasingly skewed from the 1980s onward. In 2019, the U.S. economy was more unequal than it had been since the 1920s. Younger generations could no longer expect that their lives would be better than those of their parents. Such economic adversity and associated status anxiety can trigger a heightened propensity for us-versus-them ways of engaging the world. In both South Africa and the United States, polarization was fueled by divisive political entrepreneurs, and in both countries, these entrepreneurs leveraged inequality in ways that added fuel to the fire. In the 2010s, South Africa went through a new ideational reckoning, in part to correct the view that the transition to democracy had washed the country’s apartheid history clean. But opportunistic political entrepreneurs also pushed an increasingly polarized and re-racialized political discourse and pressure on public institutions, with predictable economic consequences. South Africa’s economy slid into sustained stagnation. Paralleling South Africa, America’s divisive political entrepreneurs also cultivated an us-versus-them divisiveness. However, unlike in South Africa, political entrepreneurs and economic elites in the United States also used divisive rhetoric as a way to persuade voters to embrace inequality-increasing policies that might otherwise not have won support. By the late 2010s, the risks were palpable in both South Africa and the United States of an accelerating breakdown of the norms and institutions that sustain inclusive political settlements. For South Africa, the reversals were not wholly unexpected, given the country’s difficult inheritance—though a recent turn away from angry populism suggests that, paradoxically, the rawness and recency of the anti-apartheid struggle and triumph might perhaps offer some immunization against a further-accelerating a downward spiral. But for the United States, the converse may be true. Increases in inequality since the 1980s, and their attendant social and political consequences, have been largely self-inflicted wounds. Complacency bred of long stability may, for decades, have been lulling the country into political recklessness at the inequality-ethnicity intersection, a recklessness that risks plunging the country into disaster. But this paper’s analysis is not all gloom and doom. South Africa’s escape from the shackles of apartheid teaches that, even in the most unlikely settings, downward spirals of despair and anger can transmute into virtuous spirals of hope. The country’s first fifteen years of democracy also show that, once a commitment to change has taken hold, making the shift to an inclusion-supporting economy is less daunting than it might seem. Reforms that foster “good enough inclusion” can be enough to provide initial momentum, with the changes themselves unfolding over time—and an initial round of change can bring in its wake a variety of positive knock-on effects. But lessons can be overlearned. Mass political mobilization was pivotal to South Africa’s shaking loose the shackles of apartheid—and new calls to the barricades might seem to be the obvious response to current political and governmental dysfunction. However, different times and different challenges call for different responses. In both contemporary South Africa and contemporary America, the frontier challenge is not to overthrow an unjust political order but to renew preexisting formal commitments to the idea that citizenship implies some shared purpose. Renewal of this kind might best be realized not by confrontation but rather by a social movement centered around a vision of shared citizenship, a movement that views cooperation in pursuit of win-win possibilities not as weakness but as the key to the sustainability of thriving, open, and inclusive societies.
Topic:
Governance, Democracy, Inequality, Institutions, and Polarization
Political Geography:
Africa, South Africa, North America, and United States of America

6. A Report to Congress on Sources of and Access to State Death Data

Author:
Brenna Issman
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The National Academy of Public Administration
Abstract:
Data on deaths in America are collected and maintained by state vital records offices (VROs). Yet, these data are vitally important to administering federal programs like the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, identifying eligible individual survivor benefits, and preventing improper payments to deceased individuals. SSA also shares this death data with qualifying federal and state agencies for programmatic purposes. Because these data are initially collected by VROs, a series of budgetary, information security, and reporting issues arise when the data are used by federal agencies. Most VROs rely heavily on death certificate fees purchased by the public to support vital event activities, including the implementation and maintenance of Electronic Death Registration (EDR) Systems. In accordance with Section 802 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, the National Academy of Public Administration (the Academy) conducted a study and prepared a report to Congress on the sources of and access to death data for SSA, identifying unmet needs of federal agencies and developing a set of options for providing federal agencies with limited access to state death data. These options were developed to bolster program integrity, address the need for data privacy and security, and best reflect the efficient and effective roles and responsibilities of federal and state agencies. This study highlights the criticality of the intergovernmental system and two of the Academy’s Grand Challenges in Public Administration - Fostering Social Equity and Ensuring Data Security and Privacy Rights of Individuals. As VROs rely on fees from the public for the majority of their funding, it is important to consider both the economic impact on those who pay for death certificates for recently deceased loved ones and the value of state death data to federal agencies. Increased use of EDR for the collection and transfer of death data from the states to the federal government requires enhanced cybersecurity measures to protect the public against fraud and identity theft. The Academy continues to explore these grand challenges as well as intersections of the federal, state, and local issues through the Center for Intergovernmental Partnerships. I would like to thank the National Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems (NAPHSIS), the many VRO officials, and the SSA representatives who provided their time and knowledge to the Study Team and Panel over the last year. I am also deeply appreciative of the work of the Study Team and to the Panel of five Academy Fellows whose expertise and experience guided the development of this report. Their careful analysis and thoughtful insights resulted in evidence-based options for consideration for Congress and SSA that will help improve death data sharing between the states and federal government.
Topic:
Governance, Social Security, Federalism, and Death
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

7. Enabling US Government Participation in Pull Mechanisms for Social Impact Innovation: A Survey of Federal Authorities, Budgetary Barriers, and Potential Solutions

Author:
Steven Kosiak and Rachel Silverman
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
United States government support for scientific and technological research and development (R&D)—across sectors including but not limited to energy, agriculture, and health—has the potential to save lives, reduce global poverty, and help address the most pressing global challenges. Traditionally, the US government has funded most R&D via grants and contracts (“push” funding), directly subsidizing and defraying the up-front R&D costs. An alternative approach—“pull” funding—would use the promise of future sales and/or other revenue to indirectly justify up-front expenditures in R&D, thereby “pulling” innovations to market. Despite several theoretical and practical advantages of “pull” funding, US government use of this approach has thus far been limited, in part due to regulatory and legal barriers. Yet across the entirety of the US government, there are nonetheless creative and interesting approaches to support innovation which include pull elements. To help the US government make broader use of pull approaches, this policy paper surveys the ways in which US government authorities, budgetary rules, and procurement approaches either facilitate or constrain use of pull mechanisms to support R&D. It specifically focused on the budgetary “scoring” issues that can affect, and sometimes hinder, the use of such mechanisms. It concludes with a discussion of potential legislative changes and workarounds to budgetary scoring challenges that might facilitate expanded use of these mechanisms.
Topic:
Governance, Budget, Innovation, and Research and Development
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. A Review of the 2X Women’s Initiative: Recommendations for the Biden-Harris Administration

Author:
Megan O'Donnell and Jocilyn Estes
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Amidst an economic crisis disproportionately impacting women in low- and middle income countries, the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is well positioned to prioritize the promotion of gender equality through its investment portfolio and in turn contribute to an inclusive recovery. This policy paper reviews the extent to which DFC (and its predecessor, OPIC) have focused on the promotion of women’s economic empowerment and broader gender equality to date, particularly through the 2X Women’s Initiative. Using project data from the DFC project database and mobile application, as well as consultations with the DFC 2X team, we compile all 2X projects and analyze key trends across sector, geography, financial tool and intermediary. The paper also reviews the initiative’s contributions to accelerated momentum in gender lens investing across development finance institutions through the 2X Challenge. After highlighting strengths of DFC’s gender lens investing approach, as well as gaps and areas of opportunity, we make recommendations for how DFC under the Biden-Harris administration can both build on DFC’s early progress to improve gender integration in external lending, technical assistance, advisory services, and its internal policies and practices – as well as increase the ambition of its gender targets and its focus on transparency and results.
Topic:
Governance, Women, Leadership, and Gender
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

9. Building Back Better: A National Jobs Strategy

Author:
Mary Alive McCarthy, Carl Van Horn, and Michael Prebil
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Aspen Institute
Abstract:
The United States has a jobs problem. When the COVID-19 pandemic plunged the economy back into recession in early 2020, it laid bare a fragile and profoundly inequitable labor market. In the absence of a robust and coordinated recovery strategy focused on increasing the supply of good jobs, the same labor market pathologies that plagued the last recovery will re-emerge: the long-term unemployed will struggle to land jobs and many will give up; private sector job growth will be slow and uneven; many new jobs will be worse than those they replace; unemployment among Black and Latinx workers will remain elevated; and income and wealth gaps will widen. This recovery must be different. The Biden-Harris administration has an historic opportunity to lay the foundation for an economy built on good jobs, one that ensures the benefits of economic growth are broadly and fairly shared This publication provides a set of concrete recommendations to help guide an all-of-government jobs strategy, including three goals to guide a national jobs agenda, a suite of distinct but reinforcing strategies to achieve them, and a framework for coordinating activities across government.
Topic:
Security, National Security, Infrastructure, Governance, Job Creation, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

10. Endogenous Growth, Skill Obsolescence and Fiscal Multipliers

Author:
Wolfgang Lechthaler and Mewael F. Tesfaselassie
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
We analyze the effects of government spending in a New-Keynesian model with search and matching frictions featuring endogenous growth through learning-by-doing and skill loss from longterm unemployment. We show that medium-run and long-run output and unemployment multipliers are much larger compared to the standard model that abstracts from endogenous growth and skill loss. In our model the aggregate effect of a temporary fiscal stimulus is amplified via the skill loss channel through lower training costs. Via the learning-by-doing channel, it leads to hysteresis in human capital accumulation and thereby output. These results hold for alternative forms of fiscal financing (lump-sumtax, distortionary tax and government debt) as well as alternative labor market institutions (US and Europe).
Topic:
Governance, Economic Growth, Economic Theory, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America