Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Europe Publishing Institution German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)

11. The Gendered Nature of Poverty: Data, Evidence and Policy Recommendations

Author:
Francesco Burchi and Daniele Malerba
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Poverty and gender equality are at the heart of the 2030 Agenda and are key strategic areas for Germany’s Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). It has been often argued that poverty is gendered: at the 1995 UN World Conference on Women, 70 per cent of the world’s poor was said to be female. However, that figure is not backed by sound scientific evidence. There are several challenges to examining the relationship between gender and poverty. The main one is that monetary poverty is calculated at the household level: it is not possible to distinguish the poverty status of different household members. Theoretically, it is possible to analyse poverty by gender by focusing on non-monetary dimensions, as several feminist scholars advocate. However, the most well-known indices of multidimensional poverty have the same problems as those for income poverty: they are computed at the household level. Therefore, we do not really know if – or to what extent – poverty is gendered. Recent studies conducted by IDOS researchers help fill this gap by analysing gender disparities in multidimensional poverty in more than 80 low- and middle-income countries and using individual-level indices, which encompass three dimensions: education, health and employment. This policy brief summarises the main findings of the IDOS studies and presents key policy recommendations. The research reveals the female face of poverty. In recent years, female multidimensional poverty has been higher than male multidimensional poverty almost everywhere: on average, the former is about 70 per cent higher than the latter. Depending on the specific poverty index used, women make up between 54 and 63 per cent of the impoverished population. Gender disparities vary substantially across the world: the largest disparities are visible in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and South Asia. The research also shows that from the late 1990s/early 2000s most countries experienced increased gender disparities in poverty, a process often referred to as the “feminisation of poverty”. This largely occurred in Europe and Central Asia, as well as in Latin America and the Caribbean. The very large gender disparities in MENA and South Asia have persisted for decades. The studies also find that the increase in gender disparities occurred especially in rural areas and was mostly driven by an increase in disparities in access to paid employment. To tackle the gendered nature of poverty, we recommend: • Incentivising women’s employment and pro-moting the care economy. Care policies can partly free women from their care duties and/or recognise the economic value of care work, thereby increasing employment opportunities for women. Expanding the (professional) care sector – and more generally, the service sector – also creates job opportunities for women. • Adopting gender-responsive social protection. Cash transfers can benefit women in particular but should include clear gender-equality goals and be designed to challenge existing gender norms (rather than reinforce them). • Tackling gender norms. Eliminating discriminatory laws and regulations can help in the short term; education and awareness campaigns are critical in the long run. • Advocating for and realising the (gender) data revolution. It is necessary to invest in ad-hoc data collection focused on individual and female experiences of poverty.
Topic:
Poverty, Equality, Gender, and Development Policy
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. New Standard Indicators for German Development Cooperation: How Useful are “Numbers at the Touch of a Button”?

Author:
Heiner Janus and Daniel Esser
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
For years, German development cooperation (GDC) has been striving to become more results-oriented. In 2022, the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) took an important step in this direction by introducing 43 standard indicators. The aim was to aggregate development results across themes and countries in order to present them to the public. The BMZ hopes for more effective communication with Parliament (Bundestag) and the general public, as well as more coherent reporting by Germany’s two main implementing organisations, the GIZ (Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit – the German agency for international cooperation) and the development bank of the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW). From an international vantage point, Germany needs to catch up in respect to results orientation. Other major actors, especially the United Kingdom, the United States and multilateral development banks, introduced compre-hensive reporting systems back in the 2010s. These organisations report on 20 to 50 standard indicators to demonstrate how their activities contribute to measurable results. On this basis, they communicate more coherently with the public. BMZ aims to create a similar basis for improved communication. In a participatory process – and jointly with the GIZ and the KfW development bank – the BMZ has formulated indicators that are equally suited to implementing organisations’ political priorities and their needs. The administrative burden of collecting the standard indicators is limited by leveraging existing data. In addition, the BMZ has set methodological standards whose obligatory use is intended to increase the quality of the data collected. However, the introduction of standard indicators also entails risks: They can set perverse incentives that encourage reporting on short-term results. Such reporting can lead to a neglect of long-term effects, which are more difficult to measure. Research also shows that indicators no longer fulfil their original purpose of providing neutral representations of change if they are used to exert political control. In addition, there are methodological challenges, such as double counting across different benchmarks, as well as concerns about unrealisable expectations. Overall, we assess the development and introduction of standard indicators in GDC positively. Yet, some important decisions are still pending. The level of detail at which the data will be shared among stakeholders and the public has yet to be determined. The quality of the data collected and the transparency of reporting will in turn determine what larger effects towards an improved results orientation of GDC can be achieved. In view of the decentralised and fragmented structure of GDC, especially regarding monitoring and evaluation systems, we hope that the new indicators can foster the harmonising of the reporting systems of the GIZ and the KfW development bank. The standard indicators can also help make GDC more transparent. We therefore recommend that all data collected be made publicly available. Finally, the integrative potential of standard indicators should be harnessed to improve the division of labour between the ministry and the two main implementing organisations towards becoming learning-oriented – both in the data collection process and during evaluation.
Topic:
Development, Government, Development Aid, Cooperation, and Impact Evaluation
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

18. The EU-CEAP Impacts on Developing Countries – Recommendations for Development Policy

Author:
Jenny To
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
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, with developing and emerging countries (DECs) playing an important role. First, DECs are essential for the primary material chains, for example, supplying material for electric vehicle (EV) batteries to the European Union (EU). Second, DECs are involved in secondary material chains: To recycle its plastic packaging, Europe relies on DECs. But despite the essential role DECs play in Europe’s transition to a circular economy, the EU-CEAP’s impact on DECs has largely gone unexamined in literature and policy discourses – a shortcoming that could reinforce Eurocentrism and jeopardise the much-needed willingness to cooperate on multilateral solutions to global challenges (Messner, 2022). This policy brief and associated discussion paper (To, 2022) outline challenges and opportunities for DECs that are related to the EU-CEAP and present recommendations for German development cooperation. In the plastic packaging sector, DECs will likely be impacted by stricter waste shipment regulation (WSR), along with higher EU recycling targets, mandatory recycled content for plastics, and bans on certain single-use plastic items. Hence, the following recommended policy actions: • To lower the risks of illegal plastic waste trade and disposal, DECs must be helped to enforce the WSR and meet tightened import regulations. • The impact of plastic waste imports on DEC domestic markets in light of changing WSR must be monitored; discussion about stricter EU waste export regulations should be initiated accordingly. • In response to plastic waste imports, plastic recycling in DECs must be improved by raising standards and investments in advanced machinery as well as working conditions for informal labourers. • Changing EU plastic ban regulations must be monitored to anticipate increased demand for plastic alternatives. For EVs and batteries, EU-CEAP regulations that could impact DECs include stricter due diligence requirements for raw materials, higher targets for retrieving secondary battery materials, as well as reusing, repurposing and recycling EVs and their batteries. In response, the following policy actions are recommended: • Help DEC suppliers meet tighter supply-chain require-ments in light of the expected steady increase in demand for virgin raw materials from DECs. • Help expand road infrastructure to make it possible to reuse EVs, ensure EV batteries for repurposing, and provide recycling machinery and know-how.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, European Union, Multilateralism, Supply Chains, Green Deal, and Circular Economy
Political Geography:
Europe

19. Learning from Each Other: The Multifaceted Potential for Partnership between the Republic of Korea and Germany

Author:
Niels Keijzer, Stephan Klingebiel, and Min Jee Oh
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Although geographically distant, there is considerable convergence in the development policy priorities of Germany and the Republic of Korea (hereafter: Korea) – and indeed scope for cooperation between them. Whereas Germany was a founding member of the international development cooperation system as we know it today, Korea is a recent member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and its Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and both an important former recipient as well as a current provider of development cooperation. The development policies and operations of Germany and Korea are confronted by a challenging global geopolitical and economic setting, as well as a worrying decline in human development globally. Both countries are being challenged to respond to this changing setting and to communicate such changes effectively in their contributions towards advancing sustainable development at home and through international cooperation. Both countries have seen considerable increases in their official development assistance (ODA) budgets during the past decade, with Korea expected to continue its gradual growth path, whereas Germany may face challenges to consolidate its ODA budget – notwithstanding its important position as the only G7 member that has reached the target of providing 0.7 per cent of its gross national income (GNI) as ODA. This policy brief describes and discusses the German and Korean systems for setting development policy.
Topic:
Partnerships, Economy, Foreign Assistance, and Development Policy
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, South Korea, and Germany

20. 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