Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

This paper reviews the current state of literature on the impacts of urbanisation on rural development in developing countries, with an emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Assessments of these effects diverge greatly. While some authors see urbanisation as strongly benefitting rural areas, for instance, through increased demand for agricultural goods and services, others highlight negative effects, for example, through the loss of livelihoods emanating from displacements and the conversion of agricultural land. Given this complexity, a review that thoroughly analyses the causal relationships between urbanisation and rural development is warranted. To do this, this Discussion Paper identifies seven channels through which urbanisation affects rural development: i) production and consumption linkages; ii) employment linkages; iii) financial linkages; iv) land market linkages; v) information and public service linkages; vi) social interactions linkages; and vii) environmental externalities. As to the first channel, production and consumption linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has increased demand for agricultural products and services; natural resources; commercialisation and modernisation of agricultural technologies; and smallholders’ participation in modern agricultural value chains. The employment channel suggests that rapid urbanisation is enabling the diversification of rural livelihoods by bringing new eco­nomic opportunities to rural areas, but the effects have not been uniform across countries and communities. With regard to financial linkages, flows from cities have increased in many developing countries, benefitting rural areas; yet some studies point to no or to negative effects due to reduced agricultural productivity from the loss of labour and technology, and the crowding out of investment. Land market effects are particularly heterogeneous. While urbanisation tends to drive land value up and encourages investments, there are also negative developments in terms of crowding out and speculation. As to information and public service linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has fostered information and knowledge flows from urban areas to rural areas which have improved income, innovation, and employment. Social interactions among urban and rural citizens more generally may bridge cultural gaps, improve the flow of information, knowledge, and resources pertinent for rural economic transformation, and thereby enhance social cohesion; yet little empirical evidence exists so far in terms of effects and causalities. Finally, urbanisation affects rural development through the environmental externalities it generates: waste disposal, environ­mental degradation, and loss of biodiversity. If appropriate technologies are put in place, urbanisation can also improve waste management and soil fertility, thus reducing the cost of agricultural production. To this end, the review has identified research gaps that have important policy implications. First, although effective rural-urban planning, monitoring and evaluation of rural-urban devel­opment policies require better data, there is lack of data collection systems or their quality is poor. In this respect, investing in emerging data sources such as satellites data can help countries improve their data collection systems and measures. Second, research is needed to revise and re­formulate better theoretical frameworks that take into account the uniqueness of African urban cities. Third, empirical evidence which documents to what extent and how rural-urban linkages provide an important arena for improving social interactions among neighbours, societies, and communities is needed. Finally, as many African countries continue to experience rapid urbani­sation (mostly urban sprawl), a thorough study of the impacts of urban externalities on agri­cultural productivity, food security, biodiversity, and the health of rural communities is necessary.

This paper reviews the current state of literature on the impacts of urbanisation on rural development in developing countries, with an emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Assessments of these effects diverge greatly. While some authors see urbanisation as strongly benefitting rural areas, for instance, through increased demand for agricultural goods and services, others highlight negative effects, for example, through the loss of livelihoods emanating from displacements and the conversion of agricultural land. Given this complexity, a review that thoroughly analyses the causal relationships between urbanisation and rural development is warranted. To do this, this Discussion Paper identifies seven channels through which urbanisation affects rural development: i) production and consumption linkages; ii) employment linkages; iii) financial linkages; iv) land market linkages; v) information and public service linkages; vi) social interactions linkages; and vii) environmental externalities. As to the first channel, production and consumption linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has increased demand for agricultural products and services; natural resources; commercialisation and modernisation of agricultural technologies; and smallholders’ participation in modern agricultural value chains. The employment channel suggests that rapid urbanisation is enabling the diversification of rural livelihoods by bringing new eco­nomic opportunities to rural areas, but the effects have not been uniform across countries and communities. With regard to financial linkages, flows from cities have increased in many developing countries, benefitting rural areas; yet some studies point to no or to negative effects due to reduced agricultural productivity from the loss of labour and technology, and the crowding out of investment. Land market effects are particularly heterogeneous. While urbanisation tends to drive land value up and encourages investments, there are also negative developments in terms of crowding out and speculation. As to information and public service linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has fostered information and knowledge flows from urban areas to rural areas which have improved income, innovation, and employment. Social interactions among urban and rural citizens more generally may bridge cultural gaps, improve the flow of information, knowledge, and resources pertinent for rural economic transformation, and thereby enhance social cohesion; yet little empirical evidence exists so far in terms of effects and causalities. Finally, urbanisation affects rural development through the environmental externalities it generates: waste disposal, environ­mental degradation, and loss of biodiversity. If appropriate technologies are put in place, urbanisation can also improve waste management and soil fertility, thus reducing the cost of agricultural production. To this end, the review has identified research gaps that have important policy implications. First, although effective rural-urban planning, monitoring and evaluation of rural-urban devel­opment policies require better data, there is lack of data collection systems or their quality is poor. In this respect, investing in emerging data sources such as satellites data can help countries improve their data collection systems and measures. Second, research is needed to revise and re­formulate better theoretical frameworks that take into account the uniqueness of African urban cities. Third, empirical evidence which documents to what extent and how rural-urban linkages provide an important arena for improving social interactions among neighbours, societies, and communities is needed. Finally, as many African countries continue to experience rapid urbani­sation (mostly urban sprawl), a thorough study of the impacts of urban externalities on agri­cultural productivity, food security, biodiversity, and the health of rural communities is necessary.

This paper reviews the current state of literature on the impacts of urbanisation on rural development in developing countries, with an emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Assessments of these effects diverge greatly. While some authors see urbanisation as strongly benefitting rural areas, for instance, through increased demand for agricultural goods and services, others highlight negative effects, for example, through the loss of livelihoods emanating from displacements and the conversion of agricultural land. Given this complexity, a review that thoroughly analyses the causal relationships between urbanisation and rural development is warranted. To do this, this Discussion Paper identifies seven channels through which urbanisation affects rural development: i) production and consumption linkages; ii) employment linkages; iii) financial linkages; iv) land market linkages; v) information and public service linkages; vi) social interactions linkages; and vii) environmental externalities. As to the first channel, production and consumption linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has increased demand for agricultural products and services; natural resources; commercialisation and modernisation of agricultural technologies; and smallholders’ participation in modern agricultural value chains. The employment channel suggests that rapid urbanisation is enabling the diversification of rural livelihoods by bringing new eco­nomic opportunities to rural areas, but the effects have not been uniform across countries and communities. With regard to financial linkages, flows from cities have increased in many developing countries, benefitting rural areas; yet some studies point to no or to negative effects due to reduced agricultural productivity from the loss of labour and technology, and the crowding out of investment. Land market effects are particularly heterogeneous. While urbanisation tends to drive land value up and encourages investments, there are also negative developments in terms of crowding out and speculation. As to information and public service linkages, the review suggests that urbanisation has fostered information and knowledge flows from urban areas to rural areas which have improved income, innovation, and employment. Social interactions among urban and rural citizens more generally may bridge cultural gaps, improve the flow of information, knowledge, and resources pertinent for rural economic transformation, and thereby enhance social cohesion; yet little empirical evidence exists so far in terms of effects and causalities. Finally, urbanisation affects rural development through the environmental externalities it generates: waste disposal, environ­mental degradation, and loss of biodiversity. If appropriate technologies are put in place, urbanisation can also improve waste management and soil fertility, thus reducing the cost of agricultural production. To this end, the review has identified research gaps that have important policy implications. First, although effective rural-urban planning, monitoring and evaluation of rural-urban devel­opment policies require better data, there is lack of data collection systems or their quality is poor. In this respect, investing in emerging data sources such as satellites data can help countries improve their data collection systems and measures. Second, research is needed to revise and re­formulate better theoretical frameworks that take into account the uniqueness of African urban cities. Third, empirical evidence which documents to what extent and how rural-urban linkages provide an important arena for improving social interactions among neighbours, societies, and communities is needed. Finally, as many African countries continue to experience rapid urbani­sation (mostly urban sprawl), a thorough study of the impacts of urban externalities on agri­cultural productivity, food security, biodiversity, and the health of rural communities is necessary.

Zusammenfassung:

Mit einem Kohle-Embargo erhöht die Europäische Union den Druck auf Russland. Nach einer Übergangsfrist soll im August keine russische Kohle mehr importiert werden. Jüngere Studien zeigen, dass Deutschland die Einfuhren aus Russland bis zum Sommer durch Importe aus anderen Ländern ersetzen kann. Da aber auch ein Aus für die russischen Erdgaslieferungen droht, müssen Pläne zur Versorgungssicherheit entwickelt werden. Das DIW Berlin hat in Szenariorechnungen analysiert, wie das deutsche Stromsystem auf einen Stopp russischer Energielieferungen (insbesondere Kohle und Erdgas) reagieren kann, ohne den beschleunigten Kohleausstieg beziehungsweise den Atomausstieg 2022 in Frage zu stellen. Es zeigt sich, dass im kommenden Jahr 2023 auch ohne russische Energielieferungen eine sichere Stromversorgung möglich ist; die Abschaltung der letzten drei Kernkraftwerke kann und sollte wie geplant im Dezember 2022 erfolgen. Kurzfristig müssen Kohlekraftwerke aus der Netzreserve genutzt und die Sicherheitsbereitschaft einiger Kraftwerke verlängert werden. Mittelfristig ist bei dem von der Bundesregierung im Osterpaket angestrebten beschleunigten Ausbau erneuerbarer Energien ein rückläufiger Bedarf an Erdgas- und Kohleverstromung bis 2030 zu beobachten. Somit bleibt das im Koalitionsvertrag angestrebte Ziel eines auf 2030 vorgezogenen Kohleausstiegs erreichbar.

Event Video 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-smolqu").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-smolqu").fadeIn(300);});});

On April 14th, IPI hosted a conversation among three former UN senior officials entitled “Reform or Dissolve: Ukraine’s Challenge to the United Nations.”

Speaking to the Security Council on April 5th, President Zelensky of Ukraine delivered a blistering critique of the UN peace and security architecture. “It is now clear,” he said, “that the goals set in San Francisco in 1945 during the creation of a global international security organization have not been achieved. And it is impossible to achieve them without reforms.”

It is hard to disagree with this statement, but is real reform possible? Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine represents a seismic event in the global system that has shaken the foundations of the global peace and security architecture. Has the international rule of law been damaged beyond repair? Or does the war present an opportunity to change the system for the better? If not now, then when? If now, then how?

In the second of a series of events on the situation in Ukraine, three former high-UN officials addressed these difficult questions and more in conversation.

Speakers:

Mark Malloch Brown, President of the Open Society Foundations, former UN Deputy Secretary-General and Administrator of the UN Development Programme

Karin Landgren, Executive Director of Security Council Report, former UN Under-Secretary-General and Head of three UN Peace Operations

Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, IPI President and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Die Ergebnisse der heutigen Sitzung des Rates der Europäischen Zentralbank (EZB) kommentiert Marcel Fratzscher, Präsident des Deutschen Instituts für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin), wie folgt:

Die EZB hält an ihrem Kurs fest, ihre Geldpolitik graduell zu straffen. Sie hat aber angesichts der enormen wirtschaftlichen Risiken durch den Krieg in der Ukraine und die Pandemie keine andere Wahl, als sich alle Optionen offen zu halten. Denn bei einem Embargo oder Lieferstopp von russischem Gas und Öl dürfte die Wirtschaft des Euroraums und auch Deutschlands in die Rezession rutschen. In diesem Fall könnte die EZB gezwungen sein, eine Kehrtwende zu vollziehen und eine wieder expansivere Geldpolitik zu verfolgen. Wenn die Wirtschaft sich hingegen weiterhin erholt, dann sollte die EZB möglichst bald mit ihrem Ausstieg aus der lockeren Geldpolitik beginnen.

Die EZB muss eine schwierige Abwägung treffen, denn sie kann kurzfristig fast nichts an der durch Energiepreise getriebenen Inflation ändern. Gleichzeitig muss sie die Inflationserwartungen weiterhin gut verankern und ihre Glaubwürdigkeit schützen. Sie muss zudem immer bereit sein, die Wirtschaft im Falle einer Rezession oder Finanzinstabilität zu unterstützen. Deshalb wird eine offene und transparente Kommunikation dieser Abwägung in den kommenden Monaten für die EZB entscheidend sein.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is in its deepest crisis since its creation. This relates to each of its three pillars: 1. trade liberalization and rules-setting, 2. trade policy monitoring, and 3. dispute settlement. Germany’s G7 Presidency will require a careful balancing between addressing long-standing issues such as aligning the WTO with the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development and reforming the dispute settlement process on one hand side and focusing on the immediate challenges presented by the geopolitical crisis as well as recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. This requires, more than ever, multilateral collaboration and innovative and interdisciplinary solutions. The G7 countries, in close cooperation with their partners, have a unique opportunity to articulate a new vision for trade and the multilateral trading system. The G7 can lead by example while also incentivizing and supporting other nations to raise the level of ambition in aligning trade policies with current world challenges. As such, the goal should not be to try to re-establish the status quo but rather to adapt the world trading systems and its rules to the realities and necessities of the 21st century and the new geopolitical context. What is needed is a WTO 2.0 that responds to the world’s peace, health and environmental challenges and proactively contributes to solving them.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is in its deepest crisis since its creation. This relates to each of its three pillars: 1. trade liberalization and rules-setting, 2. trade policy monitoring, and 3. dispute settlement. Germany’s G7 Presidency will require a careful balancing between addressing long-standing issues such as aligning the WTO with the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development and reforming the dispute settlement process on one hand side and focusing on the immediate challenges presented by the geopolitical crisis as well as recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. This requires, more than ever, multilateral collaboration and innovative and interdisciplinary solutions. The G7 countries, in close cooperation with their partners, have a unique opportunity to articulate a new vision for trade and the multilateral trading system. The G7 can lead by example while also incentivizing and supporting other nations to raise the level of ambition in aligning trade policies with current world challenges. As such, the goal should not be to try to re-establish the status quo but rather to adapt the world trading systems and its rules to the realities and necessities of the 21st century and the new geopolitical context. What is needed is a WTO 2.0 that responds to the world’s peace, health and environmental challenges and proactively contributes to solving them.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is in its deepest crisis since its creation. This relates to each of its three pillars: 1. trade liberalization and rules-setting, 2. trade policy monitoring, and 3. dispute settlement. Germany’s G7 Presidency will require a careful balancing between addressing long-standing issues such as aligning the WTO with the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development and reforming the dispute settlement process on one hand side and focusing on the immediate challenges presented by the geopolitical crisis as well as recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. This requires, more than ever, multilateral collaboration and innovative and interdisciplinary solutions. The G7 countries, in close cooperation with their partners, have a unique opportunity to articulate a new vision for trade and the multilateral trading system. The G7 can lead by example while also incentivizing and supporting other nations to raise the level of ambition in aligning trade policies with current world challenges. As such, the goal should not be to try to re-establish the status quo but rather to adapt the world trading systems and its rules to the realities and necessities of the 21st century and the new geopolitical context. What is needed is a WTO 2.0 that responds to the world’s peace, health and environmental challenges and proactively contributes to solving them.

As G7 countries generate 25% of world greenhouse gas emissions, an open and cooperative G7 climate alliance can accelerate international climate policy in a transformative and inclusive manner. Building upon a proposal of the German Government (2021), we propose several key design elements for such an alliance.

As G7 countries generate 25% of world greenhouse gas emissions, an open and cooperative G7 climate alliance can accelerate international climate policy in a transformative and inclusive manner. Building upon a proposal of the German Government (2021), we propose several key design elements for such an alliance.

As G7 countries generate 25% of world greenhouse gas emissions, an open and cooperative G7 climate alliance can accelerate international climate policy in a transformative and inclusive manner. Building upon a proposal of the German Government (2021), we propose several key design elements for such an alliance.

Event Video 
Photos

jQuery(document).ready(function($){$("#isloaderfor-bncpqz").fadeOut(300, function () { $(".pagwrap-bncpqz").fadeIn(300);});}); Download the Report

On April 11th, IPI together with the Elsie Initiative is cohosted a virtual policy forum entitled “Blue on Blue: Investigating Sexual Abuse of Peacekeepers.” This event launched the policy paper by Phoebe Donnelly of the International Peace Institute, Dyan Mazurana of Tufts University, and Evyn Papworth.

While addressing sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) by UN peacekeepers has risen as a priority, alongside increasing military women’s participation in peacekeeping forces, there has been almost no attention to sexual abuse of peacekeepers. This study is among the first to investigate, document, and analyze sexual harassment, discrimination, and assault of women and men military and police peacekeepers serving in UN and African Union peacekeeping missions.

The authors gave a short presentation of the study’s findings and their recommendations. Panelists then discussed the research findings and challenges and opportunities for taking action to address sexual abuse against peacekeeping personnel. Panelists also connected the recommendations and general findings of the paper to their own work and discussed steps for implementation.

This event and the related research are part of the Women in Peace Operations (WIPO) project, a multi-year initiative of IPI’s Women, Peace, and Security program funded by the Government of Canada’s Elsie Initiative.

Welcoming Remarks:
Dr. Adam Lupel, IPI Vice President and Chief Operating Officer

Opening Remarks:
H.E. Mr. Richard Arbeiter, Deputy Permanent Representative of Canada to the UN

Speakers:
Dr. Phoebe Donnelly, IPI Senior Fellow and Head of Women, Peace, and Security Program
Dr. Dyan Mazurana, Research Professor at the Fletcher School, Tufts University
Ms. Jane Connors, Victims’ Rights Advocate for the UN
Dr. Purna Sen, Visiting Professor, London Metropolitan University, and former Executive Coordinator and Spokesperson on Addressing Sexual Harassment and Other Forms of Discrimination, UN Women
Ms. Phillipa Adams, Chair, UN Strategic Police Advisory Group, Permanent Mission of Australia to the UN
Mr. Jon Christian Møller, Police and Justice Adviser, Permanent Mission of Norway to the UN

Moderator:
Ms. Gretchen Baldwin, IPI Research Fellow for Women, Peace, and Security

.content .main .entry-header.w-thumbnail .cartouche {background: none; bottom: 0px;} h1.entry-title {font-size: 1.8em;}

Demand-side management of energy seeks to foster energy efficiency investments and curtailment behaviour in households. The role of environmental concern and knowledge for both types of energy saving behaviour has hardly been investigated in middle income countries with growing middle classes and rising electricity demand. Drawing on unique household survey data from Ghana, Peru and the Philippines, this paper analyses the links from individual motivation to behaviour, and from behaviour to the impact on households' total electricity expenditures. We find that consumers with more environmental concern are more likely to adopt curtailment behaviours, but that concern does not influence energy efficiency investments. In turn, higher levels of environmental knowledge make households' energy efficiency investments more likely, but do not influence curtailment. Neither energy efficiency investments nor curtailment behaviours significantly impact households' electricity expenditures. Small differences between Ghana, Peru and the Philippines exist.