Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Europe Publishing Institution German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) Publication Year within 5 Years Publication Year within 3 Years

1. The Future of EU Blended Finance and Guarantees: An Assessment of Cooperation Strategies with Least Developed Countries in Africa

Author:
Erik Lundsgaarde
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus (EFSD+) is a core element of EU development cooperation and reflects the EU’s strong commitment to deploying blended finance and guarantees as development financing tools. This discussion paper examines the EU’s intentions concerning how the EFSD+ will be integrated into geographic programmes, focussing on the least developed countries (LDCs) in Africa. Based on a review of the Multiannual Indicative Programmes (MIPs) for 30 African LDCs as well as the regional MIP for Sub-Saharan Africa covering the period 2021-2027, the paper provides an overview of funding reserved for EFSD+ implementation in geographic programmes, identifies the expected EFSD+ sectoral priorities and summarises references to development finance institutions (DFIs) as EFSD+ implementation partners. This descriptive review highlights issues for the future monitoring and assessment of the EFSD+. The paper points to uncertainty about the magnitude of the management challenge that EU institutions face in EFSD+ implementation given the difficulties of predicting the scale of guarantee-backed operations in individual countries, the lack of information on the expected volume of blended finance operations, and the limited analysis of how EFSD+ tools relate to other EU funding approaches. The paper also notes that EU institutions should be more explicit about the criteria shaping EFSD+ resource commitments to clarify relevant prerequisites for the effective deployment of EFSD+ tools. Finally, the broad thematic scope for EFSD+ use implies that knowledge about how blended finance and guarantees function and how the financing approaches interact with other interventions needs to increase throughout the EU system.
Topic:
Development, European Union, Finance, Sustainability, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Africa and Europe

2. Towards a Seat at the Table: How an Initiative of Cities Got Their Voices Heard during Germany’s 2022 G7 Presidency

Author:
Maria Elisabeth Gronen and Yannick Sudermann
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
In the past, both researchers and policymakers have often underlined the important role cities have to play in reaching the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Meanwhile, city networks have become increasingly active in approaching international institutions and getting their voices heard. Among them are the Urban7 Group – a recently founded group of city associations from G7 countries advocating for a stronger involvement of cities in G7 policymaking. The discussion about who has a voice in the G7 and what role cities can potentially play in it is significant. The G7, despite being somewhat contentious, remains a highly relevant forum both in terms of the negative contribution of its members to global sustainability crises (such as climate change) and their collective economic capability to address the crises. In the past, references to the role of cities were largely absent from G7 official documents; this changed during Germany’s G7 presidency in 2022. Based on a document analysis and semi-structured interviews with ministry officials and city network representatives, this paper investigates how, in 2022, the Urban7 Group was involved in the G7 process, and which actors and contextual factors had an impact on the width and depth of this involvement. While the German presidency opted not to directly involve the Urban7 Group as an official G7 engagement group, the group nevertheless gained access to ministerial negotiations, in particular those of the new G7 track on urban development. The paper finds that this engagement was facilitated by pre-existing contacts with ministerial officials as well as changes in the delineation of ministries following the German federal election in late 2021 that led to changes in political leadership and the formation of a new ministry to take responsibility for urban development. The paper closes with critical reflections on the 2022 process, recommendations and potential avenues for future research.
Topic:
Sustainable Development Goals, Institutions, Cities, and G7
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

3. Germany and the UK: Perspectives for Deepening the Bilateral Dialogue on Development Policy

Author:
Niels Keijzer and Ina Friesen
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Germany and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) are the second- and fourth-largest providers of official development assistance (ODA) worldwide and are key actors in driving international policy discussions on global development in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the G7, the G20 and other key groupings and platforms. The development policies of both countries witnessed important convergence and detailed cooperation during the first decade of this millennium – a period when Western countries understood development cooperation as a source of considerable soft power, which was demonstrated in rising budgets and like-minded policy directions. The austerity policies that followed the global economic and financial crisis, and the UK’s decision to leave the European Union (EU) in 2016, have challenged the bilateral relationship in the development policy area between Germany and the UK. The UK’s departure from the EU has reduced the number of joint interactions and corresponding opportunities for identifying cooperation initiatives. Halfway through the period envisaged for the completion of the 2030 Agenda, both countries are adjusting their development policies, seeking to determine their future European roles and global development ambitions, but they remain key partners in global development. Both the UK and Germany have recently revised or are in the process of preparing development policy strategies as part of their integrated foreign policies – a reflection process which in recent months has been challenged to adjust to the implications of the war in Ukraine. The case remains strong for regular exchanges and cooperation on development policy between both countries, including by intensifying dialogues and resuming formal secondments between the FCDO and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). Two areas in particular offer good prospects. First of all, the UK and Germany should closely work together to deliver on the current G7 Presidency agenda – including the key focus on infrastructure investment, as initiated during last year’s UK Presidency. Other key opportunities for cooperation include gender and climate action, as well as the provision of global public goods. Secondly, Germany and the UK should seek to engage in and harness the role of the OECD as a provider of key standards for international development policy and as an important forum for peer learning. As key providers of global development finance, the legitimacy of its reporting system is essential to both countries’ influence and contribution to global development.
Topic:
Development, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Development Assistance, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, and Germany

4. Europe’s Global Gateway: A New Geostrategic Framework for Development Policy?

Author:
Mark Furness and Niels Keijzer
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The proposal by the European Union (EU) to build a “Global Gateway” to the world is potentially an important juncture in EU foreign relations. Since its official launch in December 2021, most attention has been put on the initiative’s geo­strategic implications and whether the EU can compete with China. Less attention has been paid to the Global Gateway’s implications for EU development policy in terms of strategic objectives, decision-making, thematic focus and financing. Two aspects are important in this regard. The first is whether the Global Gateway is a serious proposal that can deliver on its headline promises to massively increase European infrastructure financing in developing countries, provide partners with an alternative economic and political model to that being offered by China, and make a meaningful contribution to their efforts to realise the 2030 Agenda. The EU’s announcement that the Global Gateway will generate up to EUR 300 billion in investment by 2027 grabbed headlines, many of them sceptical. There is, however, no reason to doubt that the initiative will be adequately financed. Although the planning for the EU’s international aid budget for 2021-2027 has mostly been completed, a significant proportion remains flexible and could be spent on Global Gateway projects. As for the EU’s implementing capacity, the Gateway’s financial toolbox draws on the EU’s recent experiences with the Juncker Investment Plan and the External Investment Plan, which have both been utilised by development banks and private investors. The second aspect is whether the Global Gateway heralds a change in the EU’s motivations, objectives and modalities for cooperation with developing countries and regions. On the surface, the Global Gateway does not seem to change much. There are many thematic overlaps with existing strategic frameworks for engaging with Africa and the EU’s Neighbourhood. There is even a sense that the Global Gateway turns back the clock to the days when the EU focussed aid spending on infrastructure and emphasised its “political neutrality”. The geopolitical context in which the EU finds itself is, however, being transformed by pandemic, wars and multipolarity. The impacts of epochal events such as the Covid-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are still playing out. The Global Gateway signals a major adjustment in the EU’s response to these transformations, particularly regarding its engagement with the “Global South”. This will create a new paradigm for EU development policy, defined by strategic interests. It is likely that the new geostrategic framework will weaken the EU’s commitment to, and observance of, core develop­ment policy principles, especially the focus on poverty, partner country ownership, open governance and the “do no harm” principle. The Global Gateway’s use of aid to cata­lyse commercial investment risks further instrumentalising EU development policy. Specific measures are therefore needed to safeguard and promote the principles that the EU and its member states have committed themselves to.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Development, European Union, Development Aid, and Competition
Political Geography:
Europe

5. Ten Recommendations for Germany’s Feminist Development Policy

Author:
Ina Friesen and Alma Wisskirchen
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
In early 2022, Germany’s development minister Svenja Schulze announced the adoption of a feminist development policy. With this announcement, Germany joins a growing group of governments that have adopted or declared the adoption of an explicitly feminist perspective in their external policies. Drawing on these governments’ policies and the observations and recommendations by civil society and researchers, this Discussion Paper outlines ten key recommendations for Germany’s first feminist development policy. The first three recommendations focus on the conceptual foundation of the policy and lay out the importance of 1) an inclusive definition of gender, 2) a clarification of the feminist approach and the policy’s overall goal as well as 3) the need for an intersectional approach. The second set of recommendations concerns the implementation of the policy and stresses the importance of 4) a permanent cooperation with gender-focused and feminist organisations and 5) the necessity to increase funding for gender-related objectives in general and 6) for feminist organisations in particular. Further recommendations include 7) widening the range of sectors that target gender equality through a transformative approach and context-sensitive programming and by providing mechanisms to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the strategy’s goals, objectives and activities. The last three recommendations emphasise institutional aspects and the importance of 8) creating an institutional environment that best supports gender equality within the development ministry and its main implementing organisations, 9) the necessity of a coherent feminist approach between the different ministries, and 10) the importance of addressing possible challenges the ministry might face in the implementation of its feminist development policy.
Topic:
Development, Inequality, Feminism, and Gender
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

6. The EU-CEAP Impacts on Developing Countries: An Analysis of the Plastic Packaging, Electric Vehicles and Batteries Sectors

Author:
Jenny To
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The European Union Circular Economy Action Plan (EU-CEAP) is key to transitioning to a circular economy and climate neutrality under the EU Green Deal – and developing and emerging countries (DECs) play important roles. They are essential for primary material chains, for example, for electric vehicle batteries. DECs are also part of secondary material chains, and Europe relies on them to recycle its plastic packaging. Despite the crucial roles that DECs play in Europe’s transition to a circular economy, literature and policy discourses have not yet examined the EU-CEAP’s impact. This discussion paper fills this gap by outlining the EU-CEAP’s challenges and opportunities for DECs and presents recommendations for development cooperation.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, European Union, Batteries, Electric Vehicles, and Plastic
Political Geography:
Europe

7. Just Transitions: A Review of How to Decarbonise Energy Systems While Addressing Poverty and Inequality Reduction

Author:
Daniele Malerba
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Germany promotes “just transition” as a guiding principle for the global transition to a socially and environmentally sustainable economy that incorporates the necessary climate, environmental and energy policy measures. This includes the urgent transformation of economies to become emission neutral while ensuring a process whereby poverty and inequality are reduced, and no one is left behind. The German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), the World Bank and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) worked together to explore ways to implement the concept of just transition in German development cooperation. The two papers that have resulted from this process outline approaches to a “just transition for all” and highlight its potential to reduce poverty and inequality (SDG 1 and SDG 10). In recent decades, the interdependencies between social and ecological development have become clear: negative effects of climate change particularly affect vulnerable and marginalised groups living in poverty. At the same time, social inequalities contribute to an exacerbation of climate change. A just transition must effectively address the consequences at the international, national, regional and local levels. Both papers provide an overview of existing approaches and challenges to foster a “just transition for all”. They offer different but complementary perspectives on an increasingly important complex of topics. This first paper, by DIE, takes a broad perspective by considering the decarbonisation of the energy sector as a whole, outlining the connections between just transition, poverty and inequality, and exploring how to ensure a just transition (for both workers and consumers) through the use of different social protection mechanisms. It argues that it is possible to make energy transitions just, but that properly designed combinations of socio-economic and climate policies are needed. A second paper, by the World Bank, zooms in on the transition away from coal. It lays out key social and community impacts resulting from the decommissioning of coal assets, based on experience gained from World Bank operations and from industrialised countries, and articulates an enhanced approach to supporting the coal transition. Both provide practical recommendations for international development cooperation in general, and for German development cooperation in particular.
Topic:
Development, Poverty, Inequality, Economy, and Decarbonization
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

8. Resilience through Placemaking: Public Spaces in Rotterdam’s Climate Adaptation Approach

Author:
Katherine Peinhardt
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Public spaces are an often-overlooked opportunity for urban climate adaptation. It is increasingly clear that the unique role of public spaces in civic life positions them to enhance not only physical resilience, but also to enhance the type of social cohesion that helps communities bounce back.
Topic:
Climate Change, Social Cohesion, Resilience, and Adaptation
Political Geography:
Europe and Netherlands

9. Priorities for a Development-Friendly EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)

Author:
Clara Brandi
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The European Commission unveiled the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) in July 2021 as part of its “Fit for 55” climate-policy package. The European Commission had announced this trade-policy instrument under the Green Deal in 2019 as a means of implementing more ambitious climate-policy goals without energy-intensive sectors transferring their emissions abroad (carbon leakage). The CBAM proposal envisages imposing a levy on imports in certain energy-intensive European sectors that is proportional to the carbon content of the goods concerned. The proposal complements the EU’s existing Emissions Trading System by requiring importers of goods purchased from especially energy-intensive sectors (steel, cement, electricity, fertiliser and aluminium) abroad to purchase carbon certificates based on emissions data from abroad. CBAM is primarily designed to promote an ambitious climate policy for the EU. However, the EU’s current proposal creates the impression that it is mainly about improving domestic competitiveness at the expense of climate-policy effectiveness and development prospects. The draft legislation must now be fleshed out in detail by the EU member states and the European Parliament. In addition to addressing climate-policy effectiveness and compatibility with WTO legislation, account must also be taken of the impact on European trading partners, and, in particular, poor developing countries. Many developing countries are expected to face additional export costs as a result of the CBAM. The EU should carefully evaluate the associated disadvantages for developing countries and work towards achieving a development-friendly design of the mechanism. Corresponding improvements should be made to the CBAM in the EU’s legislative process going forward: • The EU must ensure that the border adjustments do not have a detrimental impact on poor countries. Least developed countries (LDCs) should be exempted from the CBAM. • The EU should provide targeted support to the developing countries affected by the mechanism, for instance, by building their capacity for implementing the CBAM and for reducing carbon emissions in the sectors concerned. • The EU should assist low- and middle-income partner countries with the decarbonisation of their manu¬facturing industries. • The EU should also recycle revenue from the CBAM by deploying it primarily for climate-policy purposes abroad. • The affected countries should be involved to a greater extent in future through consultations and diplomatic dialogue in the process for further develop¬ing the mechanism.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Treaties and Agreements, European Union, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe

10. Focussing European Cooperation with the Middle East and North Africa on Social Contracts

Author:
Mark Furness and Markus Loewe
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
2021 is proving to be a key year for cooperation between Europe and its neighbours in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. As the European Union (EU) launches its new multiannual budget, the COVID-19 pandemic has demanded a rethink of the political, economic and social priorities that the EU and its member states should pursue with MENA countries. Europe’s potential for positive influence on state–society relations in MENA countries has yet to be realised. The latest European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) South Communication, published in February 2021, promises a “new agenda” for cooperation with MENA countries. It does not, however, address conflicts between its own objectives, especially between liberal–democratic political and economic reforms, accountable government and respect for human rights on the one hand, and restrictive trade practices, migration management and security cooperation on the other. Furthermore, there is little bilateral policy coordination among EU member states. Focussing cooperation on social contracts would help overcome such conflicts, which are inherent in cooperation targeting short- to medium-term goals, such as migration management, resilience and private investment. In authoritarian contexts, these measures tend to strengthen the state at the expense of society, and thereby increase prospects for conflict, rather than the stability they promise. The social contract perspective is long-term. Social contracts rely on the state’s delivery of the “3 Ps”: protection (of citizens), provision (of economic and social services) and participation (in decision-making). The social contract provides an analytical tool and a set of organising principles for joint EU and member state priorities and activities. The social contract lens shows how the 3 Ps work together as a framework for social cohesion, peaceful relations and political stability. In practical terms, its use would help improve the effectiveness, coherence and coordination of EU and member state cooperation with MENA countries. Some EU member states prefer to focus on trade and economic cooperation, some on political reform and human rights, and others on migration management. If all take a more long-term perspective, they will realise that sustainable social contracts in MENA countries are good for all of their aims. All European actions should support reforms in MENA countries that aim to make social contracts more acceptable to the contracting parties – governments and social groups. Ideally, such reforms result from negotiations of social contracts between parties on equal terms. In practice, how¬ever, the negotiation power of social groups is often limited – one reason why Europe should ensure that its programmes strengthen societies at least as much as governments. This paper discusses four key cooperation areas which are potential drivers of change for social contracts: • Conflict resolution, peacebuilding and reconstruction; • Post-COVID-19 recovery: health and social protection; • Participation at local, regional and national levels; and • Mutually beneficial migration and mobility. The EU and its member states, by working together on the 3 Ps in these four areas, can influence positive change in the MENA region.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Migration, Regional Cooperation, European Union, COVID-19, and Peacebuilding
Political Geography:
Europe, Middle East, and North Africa

11. Municipal Development Policy in Germany: Current Status and Prospects

Author:
Christopher Wingens, Paul Marschall, and Eva Dick
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
German municipalities are getting increasingly involved in development policy work in Germany and abroad, with the nature of that involvement becoming ever more diverse. However, very little is known about the background or the type of these activities. Against this backdrop, the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) has conducted a study of municipal development policy (MDP) in Germany. Financed by the Service Agency Communities in One World (SKEW) of Engagement Global, this research drew upon a previous study carried out by DIE in 2009 (Fröhlich & Lämmlin, 2009) with the aim of identifying the current status of and trends in development for this policy area. To this end, DIE collaborated with the German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval) to conduct a survey of municipalities throughout Germany. In addition, semi-structured qualitative interviews were held with representatives of municipalities and relevant national and federal-state institutions. As the results show, involvement in MDP on the part of German municipalities is increasing in the context of enabling national policies and changing frameworks for international cooperation (e.g. 2030 Agenda). Large municipalities engage far more often in development policy than small municipalities. The latter often focus on low-threshold activities with fewer requirements for project management, such as the promotion of fair trade. In a number of cases, small municipalities carry out projects based on inter-municipal cooperation. MDP covers many different topics, from information and education work to diverse forms of partnerships with municipalities in the Global South. The number and variety of stakeholders involved in the municipal administration partnerships are increasing, along with the functions they carry out. Municipalities serve as implementing agents, facilitators and networkers. They are partly motivated in their international work and corresponding activities by self-interest. Their involvement, for instance, may allow them to take on international responsibility or increase their appeal as an employer to new recruits. Development policy is a shared responsibility of the German national government, federal states and municipalities. MDP is a voluntary municipal activity and is thus not practised everywhere. Human resources are often insufficient and the required knowledge is difficult to obtain. In some cases, municipalities consider the expenditure associated with the management of MDP projects to be too high. Nonetheless, municipalities make a key contribution to transnational sustainability policy through their work, most especially by enabling global objectives to be localised and/or contextualised. One of the specific benefits of MDP is its proximity to citizens and direct contact with local stakeholders in Germany and abroad. However, when measured using conventional metrics and indicators for development cooperation (such as Official Development Assistance, ODA), the municipal contribution is still insufficiently discernible. It is important to continue providing support to municipalities, with as little red tape as possible, in order to fully exploit the potential MDP has in municipalities that are already involved in this work and those which are not yet involved.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Sustainability, and Municipalities
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

12. The External Dimensions of the European Green Deal: The Case for an Integrated Approach

Author:
Svea Koch and Niels Keijzer
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
The European Green Deal conveys the EU’s ambition to adjust and “green” its economic growth trajectory and become climate-neutral by 2050, as part of its contribution to the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals. While being ambitiously pursued within the Union’s own borders, the Green Deal also has strong external ramifications, as the EU leaves a tremendous ecological footprint in other parts of the world. The EU has referred to this “external dimension” of the Green Deal without further defining it, and appears to primarily understand it as a reflection of the internal strategies and as a call for the EU’s partner countries to follow a sustainable recovery trajectory similar to its own. A number of proposed EU domestic strategies (e.g. biodiversity, blue economy or farm-to-fork) contain chapters on global aspects, yet the EU seems to follow a predominantly sectoral logic to implementing the external dimension of the Green Deal. This approach has certain shortcomings. For one, it creates uncertainty for partner countries on how to adapt to the EU’s new rules, regulations and standards, and the extent of EU support for adjusting to this. It also creates a vacuum for member state engagement by means of their economy, finance, climate and foreign policies. Last but not least, it lacks clear governance mechanisms to address potentially conflicting policy objectives and to strive for greater coherence of domestic and external EU policies. Ultimately, the EU needs to define the different external dimensions of the Green Deal and promote an integrated approach. Whereas this applies universally to all partner countries of the EU, we focus in particular on developing countries in this paper. We consider these dimensions to be (1) promoting the Green Deal in bilateral and regional cooperation, (2) ensuring coherence and addressing negative spillovers, both in trade and domestic policies and (3) the EU’s global leadership in multilateral fora. Combining those three dimensions and governing them across EU institutions and member states allows for the external response to become an integral part of the EU Green Deal. Such an integrated approach allows the EU to claim leadership vis-à-vis other global powers, make credible commitments in multilateral fora for successful “green diplomacy”, and use its market and regulatory power to transform itself and others. In its bilateral relationships, the EU needs to strike a “deal” in the true sense of the word: together formulating and “owning” cooperation agendas that are clear in terms of what is in it for the EU’s partners and how the EU will cushion the potential negative adjustment costs of partners. Overall, the EU needs to avoid a “projectisation” of the external dimension of the Green Deal and clarify how the different Commission services and member states aim to work together to deliver the Green Deal, including through its various external policy areas, of which development is just one.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, European Union, Economic Growth, and Green Deal
Political Geography:
Europe

13. EU-China Engagement in Humanitarian Aid: Different Approaches, Shared Interests?

Author:
Ina Friesen and Leon Janauschek
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Protracted crises and frequent natural disasters have generated an unprecedented number of people in need of humanitarian assistance. The international community faces a great challenge in supporting these populations, as the gap between needs and available funding is growing. To close this resource gap, the European Union (EU) aims to step up its engagement with emerging donors, particularly China, to increase their level of funding. Although China has previously been reluctant to engage in the international humanitarian system, its response to the COVID-19 pandemic indicates a change in attitude. Over the past year, China has delivered hundreds of tonnes of personal protective equipment (PPE) to over 150 countries and dispatched medical teams abroad. It has also donated $100 million to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations (UN) and pledged to establish a global humanitarian response depot and hub in China in cooperation with the UN. Amidst increasing geopolitical tensions between China and the EU, China’s growing humanitarian engagement opens an opportunity for the EU to engage with China in the humanitarian sector. However, rather than framing China’s increased engagement in solely financial terms, the EU should develop a long-term strategy as to how to engage with China on humanitarian matters. A dialogue that takes both parties’ different approaches towards humanitarian aid into account and searches for common ground could open the door towards possible cooperation. This would not only help in narrowing the funding gap but carry the potential for greater coordination and consequently more effective assistance provision. China conceptualises humanitarian aid as a subcategory of development aid and provides the majority of its assistance bilaterally. Beijing’s state-centric approach to humanitarian assistance means in practice that it engages mostly in the aftermath of natural disasters rather than conflict settings. The EU, on the other hand, has a separate humanitarian aid policy that guides the allocation of funds and provides its humanitarian assistance through non-governmental organisations (NGOs), UN agencies and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). This Briefing Paper maps out the characteristics of Chinese humanitarian aid and outlines two areas on which the EU’s tentative steps towards a dialogue with China could focus. • Food security sector: Food insecurity is a key component in existing humanitarian needs, only exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Food assistance and nutrition are already a key area of engagement for the EU and China. The EU should advocate for China to scale up its contributions to global food security through the World Food Programme (WFP), with whom China has a good working relationship. This could be combined with a political dialogue on how to foster cooperation on food security assistance. • Anticipatory humanitarian aid: Disaster risk reduction, preparedness and response play an increasingly important role in global humanitarian aid. China has built up its most significant expertise in response to natural disasters. Enhancement of disaster risk reduction is one of the strategic priorities of the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) for 2020–2024. In light of both parties’ interest in anticipatory humanitarian aid, knowledge exchange in this area has the potential to open the door for future cooperation.
Topic:
International Relations, Humanitarian Aid, European Union, Food Security, and Engagement
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

14. How the Political Participation of Refugees is Shaped on the Local Level: Self-Organisation and Political Opportunities in Cologne

Author:
Milan Jacobi
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Six years have passed since the so-called “long summer of migration” of 2015, and the numbers of newly arriving asylum-seekers in Germany have flattened. However, as one of the main receiving countries of refugees, other challenges are coming into focus. Besides labour market participation and cultural participation, political participation is crucial to social life. But how to enable the political participation of refugees in host countries remains a challenge. This study examines how refugees without the condition of citizenship, who, thus, lack formal, electoral means of participation, can engage in political activities. To this end, it first uses a qualitative approach to examine how various self-organisations in the city of Cologne, Germany, use their resources to bring their interests into the political decision-making process. Second, it examines the political opportunity structures that exist at the local level to enable refugee self-organisations (RSOs) to engage in political activities. For this purpose, interviews were conducted with representatives of the organisations as well as the municipality and other civil society actors in Cologne. The results show that RSOs can be important partners for municipal decision-makers when it comes to refugee-specific issues. However, the results also suggest that opportunity structures are unevenly distributed among organisations and affect the organisations’ resource endowments, thus limiting access.
Topic:
Migration, Refugees, and Political Participation
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

15. The Rise of the Team Europe Approach in EU Development Cooperation: Assessing a Moving Target

Author:
Niels Keijzer, Aline Burni, Benedikt Erforth, and Ina Friesen
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This paper analyses the European Union’s (EU) evolving motivations, priorities and current approaches to development cooperation under the label of “Team Europe”, following its introduction in April 2020 as the European Union’s global response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It assesses what Team Europe is, to what extent and how the Team Europe approach has changed the EU’s development cooperation, which effects it has on EU initiatives to support partner countries, and discusses the implications of Team Europe on the EU’s development policy in the medium and long term. The paper analyses the Team Europe approach along four dimensions, which are traditionally emphasised in the EU’s development policy: (i) visibility, (ii) effectiveness, (iii) ownership and (iv) integration. It concludes that Team Europe primarily seeks to increase the visibility of EU’s actions in support of partner countries and prioritises European ownership of cooperation priorities over developing country ownership. Although ‘effectiveness’ efforts focus on improving efficacy of the intra-EU-MS coordinated processes, it remains unclear whether Team Europe promotes more programmatic collective action among member states.
Topic:
Development, European Union, COVID-19, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Europe

16. EU Development Policy as a Crisis-Response Tool? Prospects and Challenges for Linking the EU’s COVID-19 Response to the Green Transition

Author:
Svea Koch, Ina Friesen, and Niels Keijzer
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
This paper assesses the preferences of EU institutions and member states for the Union’s development policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Addressing both the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss and the exacerbating socio-economic inequalities requires a response that links the short-term recovery of the pandemic with longer-term socio-ecological transformations. Our findings show that the EU and its member states have mainly responded to that challenge through Team Europe and Team Europe Initiatives. While these have contributed to defining a joint European response to the pandemic, the strong focus on climate and green transitions and the lack of connections to the broader SDG agenda as well as social and human development have created tensions between some member states and the EU. A key challenge ahead in further defining the European response to the pandemic is finding new strategic directions and operational means for bridging these differing priorities.
Topic:
Climate Change, European Union, Sustainable Development Goals, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe