Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

Against the background of degrading livelihoods, mounting inequalities and related protests in rural areas of Morocco and Algeria, this article mobilises the concept of the rural social contract to analyze changes in the strategic alliances between central regimes and rural elites. It reveals how economic liberalisation reforms have affected the agricultural sector and changed the way both regimes grant their supporters access to water and land in exchange for loyalty. It also highlights that in order to maintain social peace in a context of increasing difficulties for the farmers, regimes tolerate rule-transgression in the use of water, land, and other production resources which, in turn, threatens the sustainability of current arrangements.

Against the background of degrading livelihoods, mounting inequalities and related protests in rural areas of Morocco and Algeria, this article mobilises the concept of the rural social contract to analyze changes in the strategic alliances between central regimes and rural elites. It reveals how economic liberalisation reforms have affected the agricultural sector and changed the way both regimes grant their supporters access to water and land in exchange for loyalty. It also highlights that in order to maintain social peace in a context of increasing difficulties for the farmers, regimes tolerate rule-transgression in the use of water, land, and other production resources which, in turn, threatens the sustainability of current arrangements.

Against the background of degrading livelihoods, mounting inequalities and related protests in rural areas of Morocco and Algeria, this article mobilises the concept of the rural social contract to analyze changes in the strategic alliances between central regimes and rural elites. It reveals how economic liberalisation reforms have affected the agricultural sector and changed the way both regimes grant their supporters access to water and land in exchange for loyalty. It also highlights that in order to maintain social peace in a context of increasing difficulties for the farmers, regimes tolerate rule-transgression in the use of water, land, and other production resources which, in turn, threatens the sustainability of current arrangements.

Eine neue Studie im Auftrag des Beirats Zivile Krisenprävention und Friedensförderung zeigt: Das in den Leitlinien „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern” entwickelte friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung spiegelt sich bisher nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wider und bedarf einer stärkeren Übersetzung in die deutsche Afrikapolitik.

Eine neue Studie im Auftrag des Beirats Zivile Krisenprävention und Friedensförderung zeigt: Das in den Leitlinien „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern” entwickelte friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung spiegelt sich bisher nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wider und bedarf einer stärkeren Übersetzung in die deutsche Afrikapolitik.

Eine neue Studie im Auftrag des Beirats Zivile Krisenprävention und Friedensförderung zeigt: Das in den Leitlinien „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern” entwickelte friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung spiegelt sich bisher nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wider und bedarf einer stärkeren Übersetzung in die deutsche Afrikapolitik.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has successfully set a normative framework for global cooperation, including development cooperation. Yet, the implementation of this agenda is characterised by power struggles and unresolved contestations. Hence, it is uncertain whether the 2030 Agenda will be achieved. Therefore, a key question is how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled to achieve the 2030 Agenda. As a response and guiding framework, this chapter explores the concept of “contested cooperation”, drawing on research on contested global governance and contested multilateralism. Applying this conceptual perspective not only yields theoretical insights but also helps in better understanding the practical challenges that development actors face in implementing the 2030 Agenda.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has successfully set a normative framework for global cooperation, including development cooperation. Yet, the implementation of this agenda is characterised by power struggles and unresolved contestations. Hence, it is uncertain whether the 2030 Agenda will be achieved. Therefore, a key question is how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled to achieve the 2030 Agenda. As a response and guiding framework, this chapter explores the concept of “contested cooperation”, drawing on research on contested global governance and contested multilateralism. Applying this conceptual perspective not only yields theoretical insights but also helps in better understanding the practical challenges that development actors face in implementing the 2030 Agenda.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development has successfully set a normative framework for global cooperation, including development cooperation. Yet, the implementation of this agenda is characterised by power struggles and unresolved contestations. Hence, it is uncertain whether the 2030 Agenda will be achieved. Therefore, a key question is how different narratives and norms in development cooperation can be reconciled to achieve the 2030 Agenda. As a response and guiding framework, this chapter explores the concept of “contested cooperation”, drawing on research on contested global governance and contested multilateralism. Applying this conceptual perspective not only yields theoretical insights but also helps in better understanding the practical challenges that development actors face in implementing the 2030 Agenda.

Die im Juni 2017 verabschiedeten Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ sind ein strategischer Kompass für das friedenspolitische Engagement der Bundesregierung. Ziel dieser Studie ist es einzuordnen, inwiefern das friedenspolitische Leitbild und der Anspruch friedenspolitischer Kohärenz in den afrikapolitischen Strategien der Bundes-regierung umgesetzt werden. Der inhaltliche Fokus liegt auf der Analyse der Strategiedokumente. Auf dieser Grundlage wird geprüft, ob und wie sich friedenspolitische Kohärenz in den politischen Strategien zur Kooperation mit Afrika widerspiegelt. Die Studie versteht friedenspolitische Kohärenz als das Zusammenwirken von Politiken in Bezug auf das übergeordnete Ziel der Förderung nachhaltigen Friedens im Sinne der Leitlinien.
Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie ist, dass sich die Kernbestandteile des friedenspolitischen Leitbilds der Bundesregierung nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wiederfinden. Aus dieser Diskrepanz heraus stellt sich die grundsätzliche Frage, welche strategische Funktion das friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung erfüllen sollte und wie es als strategischer Kompass für regionalspezifische Strategien und konkretes Regierungshandeln wie im Falle der deutschen Afrikapolitik operationalisiert werden kann. Auf der Grundlage der Analyse empfiehlt die Studie daher, einen Verständigungsprozess der Ressorts darüber anzustoßen, wie das friedenspolitische Leitbild auf der strategischen und regierungspraktischen Ebene umgesetzt werden kann und für welche Prinzipien des friedenspolitischen Leitbildes eine weitere Konkretisierung notwendig ist. Um dem Primat der Krisenprävention gerecht zu werden, müsste auch ein klareres Verständnis der Inhalte der Krisenprävention, geeigneter Präventionsmittel und ihres strategischen Einsatzes entwickelt werden. Dies könnte auch zu einer klareren Arbeitsteilung und einer Effektivitätssteigerung des ressortgemeinsamen Handelns der Bundesregierung in unterschiedlichen Kontexten beitragen.

Die im Juni 2017 verabschiedeten Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ sind ein strategischer Kompass für das friedenspolitische Engagement der Bundesregierung. Ziel dieser Studie ist es einzuordnen, inwiefern das friedenspolitische Leitbild und der Anspruch friedenspolitischer Kohärenz in den afrikapolitischen Strategien der Bundes-regierung umgesetzt werden. Der inhaltliche Fokus liegt auf der Analyse der Strategiedokumente. Auf dieser Grundlage wird geprüft, ob und wie sich friedenspolitische Kohärenz in den politischen Strategien zur Kooperation mit Afrika widerspiegelt. Die Studie versteht friedenspolitische Kohärenz als das Zusammenwirken von Politiken in Bezug auf das übergeordnete Ziel der Förderung nachhaltigen Friedens im Sinne der Leitlinien.
Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie ist, dass sich die Kernbestandteile des friedenspolitischen Leitbilds der Bundesregierung nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wiederfinden. Aus dieser Diskrepanz heraus stellt sich die grundsätzliche Frage, welche strategische Funktion das friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung erfüllen sollte und wie es als strategischer Kompass für regionalspezifische Strategien und konkretes Regierungshandeln wie im Falle der deutschen Afrikapolitik operationalisiert werden kann. Auf der Grundlage der Analyse empfiehlt die Studie daher, einen Verständigungsprozess der Ressorts darüber anzustoßen, wie das friedenspolitische Leitbild auf der strategischen und regierungspraktischen Ebene umgesetzt werden kann und für welche Prinzipien des friedenspolitischen Leitbildes eine weitere Konkretisierung notwendig ist. Um dem Primat der Krisenprävention gerecht zu werden, müsste auch ein klareres Verständnis der Inhalte der Krisenprävention, geeigneter Präventionsmittel und ihres strategischen Einsatzes entwickelt werden. Dies könnte auch zu einer klareren Arbeitsteilung und einer Effektivitätssteigerung des ressortgemeinsamen Handelns der Bundesregierung in unterschiedlichen Kontexten beitragen.

Die im Juni 2017 verabschiedeten Leitlinien der Bundesregierung „Krisen verhindern, Konflikte bewältigen, Frieden fördern“ sind ein strategischer Kompass für das friedenspolitische Engagement der Bundesregierung. Ziel dieser Studie ist es einzuordnen, inwiefern das friedenspolitische Leitbild und der Anspruch friedenspolitischer Kohärenz in den afrikapolitischen Strategien der Bundes-regierung umgesetzt werden. Der inhaltliche Fokus liegt auf der Analyse der Strategiedokumente. Auf dieser Grundlage wird geprüft, ob und wie sich friedenspolitische Kohärenz in den politischen Strategien zur Kooperation mit Afrika widerspiegelt. Die Studie versteht friedenspolitische Kohärenz als das Zusammenwirken von Politiken in Bezug auf das übergeordnete Ziel der Förderung nachhaltigen Friedens im Sinne der Leitlinien.
Ein zentrales Ergebnis der Studie ist, dass sich die Kernbestandteile des friedenspolitischen Leitbilds der Bundesregierung nur selektiv in den afrikabezogenen Strategien wiederfinden. Aus dieser Diskrepanz heraus stellt sich die grundsätzliche Frage, welche strategische Funktion das friedenspolitische Leitbild der Bundesregierung erfüllen sollte und wie es als strategischer Kompass für regionalspezifische Strategien und konkretes Regierungshandeln wie im Falle der deutschen Afrikapolitik operationalisiert werden kann. Auf der Grundlage der Analyse empfiehlt die Studie daher, einen Verständigungsprozess der Ressorts darüber anzustoßen, wie das friedenspolitische Leitbild auf der strategischen und regierungspraktischen Ebene umgesetzt werden kann und für welche Prinzipien des friedenspolitischen Leitbildes eine weitere Konkretisierung notwendig ist. Um dem Primat der Krisenprävention gerecht zu werden, müsste auch ein klareres Verständnis der Inhalte der Krisenprävention, geeigneter Präventionsmittel und ihres strategischen Einsatzes entwickelt werden. Dies könnte auch zu einer klareren Arbeitsteilung und einer Effektivitätssteigerung des ressortgemeinsamen Handelns der Bundesregierung in unterschiedlichen Kontexten beitragen.

Air pollution, which kills an estimated 7 million people every year, is one of the greatest environmental health risks of our times. Finding solutions to this threat poses challenges to practitioners and policymakers alike. Increasing awareness on the benefits of transdisciplinary research in solution-oriented sustainable development projects has led to the establishment of the research project “A Transdisciplinary Approach to Mitigate Emissions of Black Carbon” (TAMEBC). This paper introduces the TAME-BC research setup that took place with Metro Manila, Philippines, case study. The approach integrates BC measurements with technological, sociopolitical, and health aspects to improve the scientific state of the art, policymaking, transport sector planning, and clinical studies related to air pollution health effects. The first pillar in the setup presents an (1) air quality assessment through aerosol measurements and instrumentation, complemented by a (2) description and assessment of the current policies, technologies, and practices of the transport sector that is responsible for pollution levels in the Philippines, as well as a (3) BC exposure and associated health impacts assessment. The fourth pillar is intercrossing, fostering (4) knowledge co-creation through stakeholder involvement across scales. The authors argue that this transdisciplinary approach is useful for research endeavors aiming for emission mitigation in rapidly urbanizing regions beyond Metro Manila.

Air pollution, which kills an estimated 7 million people every year, is one of the greatest environmental health risks of our times. Finding solutions to this threat poses challenges to practitioners and policymakers alike. Increasing awareness on the benefits of transdisciplinary research in solution-oriented sustainable development projects has led to the establishment of the research project “A Transdisciplinary Approach to Mitigate Emissions of Black Carbon” (TAMEBC). This paper introduces the TAME-BC research setup that took place with Metro Manila, Philippines, case study. The approach integrates BC measurements with technological, sociopolitical, and health aspects to improve the scientific state of the art, policymaking, transport sector planning, and clinical studies related to air pollution health effects. The first pillar in the setup presents an (1) air quality assessment through aerosol measurements and instrumentation, complemented by a (2) description and assessment of the current policies, technologies, and practices of the transport sector that is responsible for pollution levels in the Philippines, as well as a (3) BC exposure and associated health impacts assessment. The fourth pillar is intercrossing, fostering (4) knowledge co-creation through stakeholder involvement across scales. The authors argue that this transdisciplinary approach is useful for research endeavors aiming for emission mitigation in rapidly urbanizing regions beyond Metro Manila.

Air pollution, which kills an estimated 7 million people every year, is one of the greatest environmental health risks of our times. Finding solutions to this threat poses challenges to practitioners and policymakers alike. Increasing awareness on the benefits of transdisciplinary research in solution-oriented sustainable development projects has led to the establishment of the research project “A Transdisciplinary Approach to Mitigate Emissions of Black Carbon” (TAMEBC). This paper introduces the TAME-BC research setup that took place with Metro Manila, Philippines, case study. The approach integrates BC measurements with technological, sociopolitical, and health aspects to improve the scientific state of the art, policymaking, transport sector planning, and clinical studies related to air pollution health effects. The first pillar in the setup presents an (1) air quality assessment through aerosol measurements and instrumentation, complemented by a (2) description and assessment of the current policies, technologies, and practices of the transport sector that is responsible for pollution levels in the Philippines, as well as a (3) BC exposure and associated health impacts assessment. The fourth pillar is intercrossing, fostering (4) knowledge co-creation through stakeholder involvement across scales. The authors argue that this transdisciplinary approach is useful for research endeavors aiming for emission mitigation in rapidly urbanizing regions beyond Metro Manila.

This article synthesizes and compares environmental governance theories. For each theory the authors outline its main tenets, claims, origin, and supporting literature. They then group the theories into focused versus combinatory frameworks for comparison. The analysis resonates with many types of ecosystems; however, to make it more tangible, the authors focus on coastal systems. First, they characterize coastal governance challenges and then later link salient research questions arising from these challenges to the theories that may be useful in answering them. Their discussion emphasizes the usefulness of having a diverse theoretical toolbox, and they argue that if governance analysts are more broadly informed about the theories available, they may more easily engage in open-minded

interdisciplinary collaboration. The eight theories examined are the following: polycentricity, network governance, multilevel governance, collective action, governmentality (power / knowledge), adaptive governance, interactive governance theory (IGT), and evolutionary governance theory (EGT). Polycentricity and network governance both help examine the links or connections in governance processes. Polycentricity emphasizes structural configurations at a broader level, and network governance highlights agency and information flow within and between individuals or organizations. Collective action theory is helpful for examining community level governance, and helps analyze variables hindering or enabling self-organization and shared resource outcomes. In contrast,

multilevel governance helps understand governance integration processes between localities, regions, and states across administrative, policy, or legal dimensions. Governmentality is helpful for understanding the role of discourse, power, knowledge, and narratives in governance, such as who creates them and who becomes governed by them with what effect. Adaptive governance helps analyze thelinks between context, change, and resilience. IGT helps examine the interdependencies between the systems being governed and the governing systems. EGT is helpful for unpacking how coevolutionary processes shape governance and the options for change.

This article synthesizes and compares environmental governance theories. For each theory the authors outline its main tenets, claims, origin, and supporting literature. They then group the theories into focused versus combinatory frameworks for comparison. The analysis resonates with many types of ecosystems; however, to make it more tangible, the authors focus on coastal systems. First, they characterize coastal governance challenges and then later link salient research questions arising from these challenges to the theories that may be useful in answering them. Their discussion emphasizes the usefulness of having a diverse theoretical toolbox, and they argue that if governance analysts are more broadly informed about the theories available, they may more easily engage in open-minded

interdisciplinary collaboration. The eight theories examined are the following: polycentricity, network governance, multilevel governance, collective action, governmentality (power / knowledge), adaptive governance, interactive governance theory (IGT), and evolutionary governance theory (EGT). Polycentricity and network governance both help examine the links or connections in governance processes. Polycentricity emphasizes structural configurations at a broader level, and network governance highlights agency and information flow within and between individuals or organizations. Collective action theory is helpful for examining community level governance, and helps analyze variables hindering or enabling self-organization and shared resource outcomes. In contrast,

multilevel governance helps understand governance integration processes between localities, regions, and states across administrative, policy, or legal dimensions. Governmentality is helpful for understanding the role of discourse, power, knowledge, and narratives in governance, such as who creates them and who becomes governed by them with what effect. Adaptive governance helps analyze thelinks between context, change, and resilience. IGT helps examine the interdependencies between the systems being governed and the governing systems. EGT is helpful for unpacking how coevolutionary processes shape governance and the options for change.

This article synthesizes and compares environmental governance theories. For each theory the authors outline its main tenets, claims, origin, and supporting literature. They then group the theories into focused versus combinatory frameworks for comparison. The analysis resonates with many types of ecosystems; however, to make it more tangible, the authors focus on coastal systems. First, they characterize coastal governance challenges and then later link salient research questions arising from these challenges to the theories that may be useful in answering them. Their discussion emphasizes the usefulness of having a diverse theoretical toolbox, and they argue that if governance analysts are more broadly informed about the theories available, they may more easily engage in open-minded

interdisciplinary collaboration. The eight theories examined are the following: polycentricity, network governance, multilevel governance, collective action, governmentality (power / knowledge), adaptive governance, interactive governance theory (IGT), and evolutionary governance theory (EGT). Polycentricity and network governance both help examine the links or connections in governance processes. Polycentricity emphasizes structural configurations at a broader level, and network governance highlights agency and information flow within and between individuals or organizations. Collective action theory is helpful for examining community level governance, and helps analyze variables hindering or enabling self-organization and shared resource outcomes. In contrast,

multilevel governance helps understand governance integration processes between localities, regions, and states across administrative, policy, or legal dimensions. Governmentality is helpful for understanding the role of discourse, power, knowledge, and narratives in governance, such as who creates them and who becomes governed by them with what effect. Adaptive governance helps analyze thelinks between context, change, and resilience. IGT helps examine the interdependencies between the systems being governed and the governing systems. EGT is helpful for unpacking how coevolutionary processes shape governance and the options for change.

Se analizan los cambios de las relaciones civiles-militares en América Latina en el escenario de crisis creado por el crecimiento del crimen organizado, el deterioro de la situación socioeconómica y la pandemia.