Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Publication Year within 10 Years

71. Solving the Double Climate Migration Paradox

Author:
Kira Vinke and Mechthild Becker
Publication Date:
08-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Human interference with the environment is fundamentally – and rapidly – reshaping geographies. Therefore, the question of where people will be able to live in safety and prosperity needs reconciling with these diametrically opposed trends: the continued use of fossil fuels, migration deterrence, and labor shortages. PDF Cover of PDF version of DGAP Commentary No. 4 application/pdf206.84 KB Share Discourses on migration and asylum-related issues have become increasingly contested in Western democracies. Anti-migrant rhetoric continues to gain momentum, particularly ahead of elections. This trend could be observed around the 2024 European elections when voters throughout the EU made migration a top priority in their decision-making. Similarly, in the United States, immigration on the southern border has become a deeply contested issue in the upcoming presidential election. “The migrant” has arguably become the scapegoat for economic and social problems in contemporary politics. The UK’s norm-defeating and dysfunctional asylum deal with Rwanda, now terminated, is just one example of how politics feeds such discriminatory narratives. While migration issues have received extensive media coverage and become increasingly politicized, a growing driver of migration has slipped down the list of political priorities: climate change.
Topic:
Climate Change, Migration, Economy, Migration Policy, and Climate Refugees
Political Geography:
Global Focus

72. Can Multinationals Withstand Growing Trade Barriers?

Author:
Mahdi Ghodsi, Michael Landesmann, and Nina Vujanović
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
Multinational enterprises (MNEs) are increasingly dealing with challenges shaped by the new geopolitical and trade environments. Besides traditional tariffs, exporting firms need to comply with regulatory non-tariff measures (NTMs) in the form of technical barriers to trade (TBTs) and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. Although trade costs associated with these policy measures affect all firms, implications could be multifaceted for multinationals that base their international activities on exporting and importing and are important for the formation of global supply chains. Applying Poisson pseudo maximum likelihood to the unique Orbis dataset of firms on multinational subsidiaries, we show that NTMs pose a greater challenge to MNEs’ subsidiaries’ activity and performance than tariffs do. High-tech manufacturing subsidiaries of foreign MNEs are particularly vulnerable to these NTMs, as they suffer higher regulatory losses. However, multinational affiliates that have higher productivity, those with full foreign ownership representation, those that are embedded within a larger international network of subsidiaries, and those that are located in trading partners with deep preferential trade agreements can turn these trade challenges to their advantage. Our results have important implications for policy makers regulating trade in goods.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Foreign Direct Investment, Multinational Corporations, Tariffs, and Supply Chains
Political Geography:
Global Focus

73. Assessing the Impact of New Technologies on Wages and Labour Income Shares

Author:
Antea Barišić, Mahdi Ghodsi, and Robert Stehrer
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper advances the literature on the impacts of new technologies on labour markets, focusing on wage and labour income shares. Using a dataset from 32 countries and 38 industries, we analyse the effects of new technologies – proxied by patents, information and communication technology (ICT) capital usage, and robot intensity – on average wages and labour income shares over time. Our results indicate a positive correlation between patents and wage levels along with a minor negative impact on labour income shares, suggesting that technology rents are not fully passed on to labour. Robot intensity is positively associated with labour income shares, while ICT capital has an insignificant effect. These effects persist over time and are reinforced by global value chain (GVC) linkages. Our conclusions align with recent research indicating that new technologies have a generally limited impact on wages and labour income shares.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Labor Issues, Investment, Global Value Chains, Robotics, and Income
Political Geography:
Global Focus

74. Technological Push and Pull Factors of Bilateral Migration

Author:
Antea Barišić, Mahdi Ghodsi, and Michael Landesmann
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper explores the complex interplay between technology adoption, specifically robotisation and digitalisation, and international migration within the EU and other advanced economies, including Australia, the UK, Japan, Norway and the US, over the period 2001-2019. Utilising a gravity model approach grounded in neoclassical migration theory, the study analyses how technological advancements influence migration flows. It examines two key technological variables: the extent of digitalisation, represented by ICT capital per person employed, and the adoption of industrial robots, measured by the stock of robots per thousand workers. The research uniquely integrates these technological factors into migration analysis, considering both push and pull effects. Additionally, it accounts for various other migration determinants such as macroeconomic conditions, demography and policy factors. The findings reveal insightful dynamics about the relationships between technological progress, labour market conditions and migration patterns, contributing significantly to the current literature and informing future migration policies and the impact of technology adoption.
Topic:
Migration, Labor Issues, Innovation, Robotics, Migrant Workers, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

75. Working from Home and Mental Well-being in the EU at Different Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Gendered Look at Key Mediators

Author:
Sandra Leitner
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This paper analyses the relationship between working from home (WFH) and mental well-being at different stages during the first two critical years of the COVID-19 pandemic, when governments repeatedly imposed lockdowns and enacted WFH mandates to contain the spread of the virus. Using data from a representative survey conducted at four different time periods in 2020 (first lockdown, subsequent gradual reopening), 2021 (further lockdown) and 2022 (restrictions widely lifted) in the 27 EU member states, it examines the potentially changing role of several mediators over time, such as work-family conflict, family-work conflict, stability, resilience, isolation, the importance of different support networks, workload, physical risk of contracting COVID-19 at work, and housing conditions. For the first lockdown, it also differentiates by previous WFH experience, in terms of WFH novices and experienced WFH workers. It differentiates by gender, in order to take the potential gendered nature and effect of COVID-19 measures into account. The results show that while there was no direct relationship between WFH and mental well-being, there are several important mediators whose relevance was specific not only to certain stages of the pandemic, but also to previous experience with WFH and gender. Stability is the only mediator that was relevant over the entire two-year pandemic period. Work-family conflict and family-work conflict were only relevant during the first lockdown, while resilience and isolation mattered especially when most of the EU economies had lifted most of their restrictions. Unlike established WFH workers, WFH novices had an advantage during the first lockdown, benefiting from lower family-work conflict and more helpful networks of family and friends. Moreover, our results differ by gender: for females who undertook WFH, important mediators were work-family conflict and family-work conflict. Both were related to adjustments they had to make in work and non-work hours in response to the enforced closure of schools and childcare facilities during the lockdowns, especially during the first. For males who undertook WFH, especially WFH novices, support from networks of family and friends was an important mediator.
Topic:
Labor Issues, European Union, Mental Health, COVID-19, Well-Being, and Working from Home
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

76. Private Finance and the Quest to Remake Modern Warfare

Author:
Michael Brenes and William D. Hartung
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Official Washington is all in on promoting a new type of warfare based on military applications of AI and other emerging technologies. This determination was on full display last year when the Biden administration unveiled the “Replicator” initiative, an attempt to develop swarms of high-tech weapons systems at relatively low cost, and in numbers capable of overwhelming any potential adversary. But the history of so-called miracle weapons offers ample reasons to doubt Replicator’s supposedly transformative potential. Previous innovations, from the “electronic battlefield” in Vietnam to drone warfare in the Global War on Terrorism, did not, in fact, revolutionize war as we know it. Cutting-edge technology is no substitute for sound strategy or a realistic assessment of what military force can achieve. Unfortunately, so far, at least, these lessons from history have been no match for the boosterism of venture capital (VC) firms that pride themselves on disrupting industries and overturning conventional wisdom. While estimates of total VC funding of emerging military technology vary widely, it is clear that private investments in emerging weapons technologies are large and growing, driven by a handful of major Silicon Valley players, including Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund and Andreessen-Horowitz. Companies backed by these firms, including Palantir, Anduril, and SpaceX, have already landed major contracts for weapons systems that incorporate next-generation technology. These firms and their allies in the Pentagon and Congress are determined to move full speed ahead on the development and deployment of weapons based on AI and other technological innovations, despite many unanswered questions about the costs and risks involved. While the bulk of Pentagon funding still goes to the “big five” contractors — Lockheed Martin, RTX (formerly Raytheon), Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman — VC-backed startups aspire to become the future of military contracting, and they hope that AI and other emerging technologies will be their ticket. These startups may prove to be more nimble and innovative than the bloated, top-heavy firms that currently dominate the arms industry, but they should not be allowed to operate with impunity. Congress must establish ground rules that prevent military startups from exploiting the procurement process in ways that pad their bottom lines while providing flawed systems — outcomes that we have seen all too often from their traditional rivals. What is most important, the rush to profit from emerging military tech cannot be allowed to short-circuit the careful scrutiny and wide-ranging public debate that must precede any move toward a brave new world of autonomous warfare in which human intervention in the kill chain is significantly reduced, if not eliminated. This brief offers policymakers a framework for ensuring that unsupported promises to “reinvent” warfare don’t exacerbate the cycle of corruption and waste that has all too often plagued the Pentagon’s procurement process, to the detriment of our safety and security.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Finance, Grand Strategy, and Warfare
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

77. Responsibly Demilitarizing U.S.–Mexico Bilateral Security Relations

Author:
Aileen Teague
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
These are trying times for U.S.–Mexico relations. As America’s opioid epidemic reaches unprecedented proportions, U.S. politicians have begun to advocate unilateral military action against Mexican drug cartels in sovereign Mexican territory. This approach would not only do extraordinary damage to one of America’s most vital international relationships, but also carry a real risk of importing violence to the United States. The calls for military action have infuriated Mexico’s leaders, who in turn criticize America’s broken and inhumane border security and Washington’s inability to curb the seemingly insatiable demand for drugs in the United States. The basis for the neighboring nations’ security cooperation, the 2008 Mérida Initiative, seems to have failed, largely failing to stem the tide of violence and instability in Mexico, or to halt the cross border flow of migrants, guns, and drugs. The result is poor regional security and a deteriorating bilateral relationship. There is reason to hope that the Plan Mérida’s replacement, the U.S.–Mexico Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe Communities, will strengthen bilateral cooperation and help put security relations on a path to demilitarization. However, since the State Department announced the framework in 2021, little progress has been made in developing the shape and contents of this program. The continued failure to articulate how the Bicentennial Framework will represent a meaningful break from failed policies in the past suggests militarized enforcement may still dominate security relations for years to come. This status quo poses grave risks to both countries. But through the Bicentennial Framework, U.S. policymakers have the potential to make meaningful changes in bilateral security relations by: Rejecting U.S. unilateralist measures against Mexico Developing more robust policies to halt U.S. arms flow to Mexico Reducing the military’s role in enforcement functions and redirecting military entities toward civil action and development Supporting Mexico–led development programs By decreasing the scope of militarization in regional security policies through an appropriately designed Bicentennial Framework, the United States and Mexico can achieve healthier and more balanced relations, and eliminate the risk of a worst-case scenario: unilateral U.S. military intervention next door.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Global South, Borders, Restraint, and Security Cooperation
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, Global Focus, and United States of America

78. Performing Diasporic Resistance: (Re)Claiming the Heritage Language

Author:
Shushan Karapetian
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
“All wars are fought twice, the first time on the battlefield, the second time in memory,” writes Pulitzer Prize-winning author Viet Thanh Nguyen.1 In the landscape of memory, language is the theater of war. Through language, we frame the narratives of our experiences and transmit those narratives for the historical record as individuals and collectives. The chronology and processes so profoundly articulated by Nguyen have merged in the recent decade such that combat on the physical battlefield does not necessarily precede the curation of narratives about the war. They now take place synchronously. Due to advances in digital media and communication technologies, the landscape, strategies, and potential combatants have outgrown geographic, physical, and temporal limitations. Civilians can now participate in military conflicts through digital and participatory warfare enabled by the hyperconnected battlefield of social media platforms. In parallel with actual fighting in combat zones and the official narratives of the states involved in war, new participatory modalities within a global digital battlefield are impacting the representation, perception, participa- tion, and memorialization of conflict. The mobilization of transnational human resources by diasporas can enlarge the scope of civilian participation in warfare, impacting war’s narration, cura- tion, and framing. In this current environment, language becomes the theater of war, not just within the post-combat landscape of memory, but also during combat—in the parallel digital battlefields of modern-day participatory warfare. It is, therefore, important to consider how language is viewed and used during war, particularly the heritage language of diasporan civilians. More specifically, we must assess the extent to which the heritage language is employed as both a symbolic and strategic tool in wartime transnational activism in processes through which diasporic identities are fashioned. In this essay, I examine the role of the Armenian language in the unprecedented transnational mobilization of Armenian communities across the globe during and after the 2020 Nagorno- Karabakh War.2 I argue that transnational actors (re)claimed the Armenian language as an act of resistance in the context of participatory warfare, which not only intensified the existing symbolic range of the Armenian language as a central identity marker, but also introduced a novel instrumental element for many Armenians.
Topic:
Diaspora, Language, Participation, Heritage, and Resistance
Political Geography:
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Global Focus, and Nagorno-Karabakh

79. The Evolution and Ethics of Accountability Sanctions

Author:
Mark Ferullo
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
When Yahya Jammeh seized power in The Gambia in 1994 in a bloodless coup d’état, the young army colonel’s promise to eliminate corruption seemed disin- genuous. At the time, few Gambians could have anticipated how corrupt and cruel his rule would be. His Excellency Sheikh Professor Al-haji Dr. Yahya A.J.J. Jammeh Babili Mansa, as he titled himself, brutalized his country for over two decades. In 2022, The Gambia’s Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Com- mission exposed the extent of his violence, revealing that he commanded a hit squad that crushed dissent through murder, torture, and rape. His claim that he could cure AIDS with herbs might have been dismissed as the delusions of an out-of-touch autocrat were it not for the loss of life this lie caused during the medical trials.1 When the United States placed economic sanctions on Jammeh in 2017, most Gambians had little sympathy for their former leader, and few denied he deserved punishment.2 By then, Jammeh had fled the country, but the United States sanctioned him anyway. Jammeh joined 12 other individuals—including an organ-trafficking surgeon from Pakistan, a Guatemalan Congressman who ordered the killing of a journalist, and a Ukrainian police commander who oversaw the shooting of peaceful protestors in Kyiv during the Revolution of Dignity three years prior—as the first designations under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. “There is a steep price to pay for their mis- deeds,” said Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin at the time.3
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Sanctions, Economy, and Accountability
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

80. Science Diplomacy in the Negotiation of International Business Contracts: A Critical Assessment

Author:
Suada Dzogovic, Anita Cucovic, and Armand Krasniqi
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
Institution:
Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
Abstract:
This study investigates the significance of science diplomacy at the convergence of politics, diplomacy, and science, emphasizing its heightened relevance in contemporary geopolitics and economic development. The aim was to elucidate the role of science diplomacy in optimizing negotiation outcomes concerning international business contracts by examining students’ perceptions of its impacts in such contexts. A theoretical analysis was initially conducted to identify the main themes shaping our questionnaire by employing a comprehensive research strategy that combines quantitative and qualitative methods. Data collection was carried out through a survey using a five-point Likert scale. The study revealed the students’ positive evaluation of science diplomacy, indicating their recognition and appreciation of its utilization in enhancing negotiation outcomes over international business contracts. While political leadership remains crucial in economic negotiations, our findings underscore the significant impact of science diplomacy in promoting international economic relations and facilitating domestic companies’ access to global markets. This research significantly contributes to our understanding of the multifaceted role of science diplomacy in global knowledge dissemination and problem-solving. It elucidates the importance of science diplomacy in international relations and academia, emphasizing its constructive impact on addressing complex challenges.
Topic:
International Relations, Development, Communications, Business, Negotiation, Contracts, and Science Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Global Focus