Search

Begin New Search Topic Transition Political Geography Europe

1. Fast, Fair, Funded and Feminist: A pathway to a just and transformative climate transition within and beyond the UK

Author:
Natalie Shortall, Chiara Ligouri, and Ruth Mayne
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
The world is in the grip of a climate emergency. Urgent and equitable action is essential to prevent yet further escalating climate impacts that are devastating communities worldwide and to safeguard a liveable planet for future generations. For governments everywhere, including the UK Government, this is a defining test of leadership. But it is also a moment of opportunity—an opportunity to build economies and societies that are not only decarbonised and climate resilient, but that actively reduce inequalities, are more inclusive, and prioritise the wellbeing of people and the planet over short-term profit. In this report, we outline key steps the UK Government can take to lead the way toward a just and transformative transition—one that not only stabilises the climate but also delivers fairness and justice for all.
Topic:
Climate Change, Government, Transition, Climate Justice, and Net Zero
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

2. The Europeanisation of the Energy Transition in Central and Eastern EU Countries: An Uphill Battle that Can Be Won

Author:
Diana-Paula Gherasim
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
Russia’s war in Ukraine, and the brutal decoupling from Russian fossil fuels, is a game changer for the Central and Eastern Europe region which was still heavily dependent on Russia for its energy supply. There are still a few oil, gas, and nuclear fuel supplies, but the sharp decline, and search for alternatives, lead to a shift in paradigm: deploying low-carbon technologies and energy efficiency is now a matter of national security and economic security. Hence, following the 2022 energy crisis, the understanding that the European Union’s (EU) energy security of supply means an acceleration in phasing out fossil fuels and deploying clean energies has become the newest European acquis in energy policy, increasing the importance of the Green Deal at EU, national and local levels. The risk that a carbon wall would be erected within Europe between the West and the Central and Eastern European Member States (CEECs) is no more valid. The concept of Europeanization is at the core of the analysis of the energy transition in the CEECs. The progress on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction observed in these Member States (MS) can be considered as a success of the Europeanization process in this region, as its timing coincides with the implementation of the 2020 agenda for climate and energy, to the establishment of which these countries were part of. Moreover, the Clean Energy Package and the Green Deal seem to have been successful in putting in place a mechanism of cognitive framing pertaining to the Europeanization toolbox, by setting a framework for all Europeans to move in the same direction, of a cleaner and healthier way of living, independently of their starting point. Given the status quo in the ten CEECs, the new ambitious objectives regarding transport decarbonization will translate into important transformation costs for the region, which in turn could increase the risk of renegotiation attempts, as the circular Europeanization theory predicts. The acknowledgment at the EU level that the transition must be just to succeed is one instance of bottom-up Europeanization, where the challenges brought forward by specific Member States shaped the European energy transition agenda and discourse. Large financial support for this end was a first condition for CEECs to support the climate neutrality agenda. The second condition is that CEECs plan to replace their coal fleet at least partially with nuclear power, be they reactor capacity expansions, lifetime extensions, large new reactors, or small modular reactors (SMRs). The third condition has been securing a role for the use of natural gas for the transition, which in 2022 turned out to be a costly choice. With the crisis, CEECs have all taken on board the necessity to boost renewables as a tool to rapidly decrease dependence on imported fossil fuels, to meet the 2030 targets, prepare for the progressive phase-out of free emission allowances while awaiting the new nuclear generation capacities due from 2035 onwards. This strategy is also supported by public opinion, while it remains to be seen how public acceptance of SMRs will be. This gives the CEE region a strong joint interest to push for the inclusion of nuclear energy in EU legislations, alongside France. On gas, countries have switched to liquefied natural gas (LNG) and diversified their pipeline supplies, and where possible, try to boost the domestic supply of natural gas and soon, biomethane. Although being relatively far from alternative gas entry points means that for some CEECs Russia remains, to a certain extent, a necessity, this cannot be used as an excuse for undermining EU unity and should push towards harder EU-level reflections on energy solidarity on which some progress was done during the 2022 energy crisis. It remains to be seen if a new line of fragmentation will not appear between Germany and Austria on the one hand and the CEEs on the other: following the Nord Stream betrayal and denial by Germany of Polish energy security concerns for example, CEECs are concerned about the extraterritorial outreach of Germany’s nuclear phase-out policies, and of Austria’s continued systemic opposition to nuclear. This plays in the hand of the United States, which is the ultimate gatekeeper to pressure Germany and secure the energy technology choices of CEECs through the export of US technologies. Of note is also the shared concern now over the dependence on Russian nuclear fuels and equipment, and efforts to reduce this. A last source of possible tensions comes from some new gas infrastructure investments which can strengthen resilience but risk locking in gas much longer than the EU trajectory allows for. Beyond nuclear energy, however, the interest in accelerating the deployment of renewables, and the concern over a just transition, the note shows that there is little in common between the CEECs which have all their specificities. Last but not least, this note argues that a new risk of fragmentation may emerge, related to the localization of innovation and the volume of state aids and subsidies to industries. While some CEECs appear to be a frontrunner in the deployment of battery cell gigafactories, their financial and budgetary capacities are much more limited compared to Western MSs, and their ability to develop comprehensive, coherent climate plans, and to mobilize EU tools and funding, is also limited. Without an EU Sovereignty Fund, the region will find it hard to keep pace with EU’s objectives in the Net-Zero Industry Act and the Critical Raw Materials Act due to limited fiscal space to be leveraged for state aid purposes, despite more favorable conditions.
Topic:
European Union, Renewable Energy, Fossil Fuels, Transition, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, and Central Europe

3. Different Choices, Divergent Paths: Poland and Ukraine

Author:
Thorvaldur Gylfason, Eduard Hochreiter, and Tadeusz Kowalski
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
We compare the economic growth trajectories of Poland and Ukraine since 1990 to try to understand the extent to which the observed growth differentials can be traced to increased efficiency in the use of capital and other factors (intensive growth), rather than to simple accumulation of capital (extensive growth). We stress the role of qualitative factors such as education, governance and institutions. We ask whether the EU perspective and NATO membership played a role. We discuss the closely related histories of the two countries and note the stark differences between them, including their different approaches to the EU vs Russia, full vs incomplete transition to a market economy, and democracy vs anocracy, as well as different initial conditions. We compare key determinants of growth and growth trajectories, using economic as well as social indicators, and trying to disentangle efficiency and accumulation and combine path dependence and the role and scope of creative destruction. While Poland had the shortest and mildest transformation recession among CEE countries, Ukraine has been stagnant, or in decline, since 1990. The statistics we report and the stories we tell suggest that both countries have a complex relationship with democracy and that the nearly threefold difference in per capita GDP at PPP in 2021 in Poland’s favour, with the ratio of investment to GDP similar in both countries, can most plausibly be traced to: (a) Poland’s more extensive and diversified exports, and fewer restrictions on trade, in addition to more comprehensive and quicker restructuring of the national economy inspired by the EU perspective; (b) Poland’s more extensive and better-quality education; (c) Poland’s greater democracy and longer experience of democracy, lower levels of corruption, better governance, and freer press; (d) Poland’s smaller agricultural sector and greater emphasis on manufacturing; and (e) Poland’s lower inflation and higher level of financial development. Furthermore, Poland built market-friendly institutions to EU specifications and joined NATO. Against all this, Ukraine had more economic equality and lower unemployment as well as, from the early 1990s, a lower initial level of income per person, but was hampered by political divisions, path-dependent corruption and poor governance. During the global Covid-19 pandemic, Ukraine apparently suffered fewer deaths than Poland, despite fewer vaccinations.
Topic:
Economics, Education, Governance, Reform, European Union, Economic Growth, Inflation, Exports, Transition, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Poland

4. New Labour, New Britain: Sunder Katwala

Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Mile End Institute, Queen Mary University of London
Abstract:
n this panel discussion from the Mile End Institute's New Labour, New Britain conference, Sunder Katwala considers whether there was a 'Blair Revolution' in British politics, how the Blair-Brown administrations changed Britain and how important identity has been to contemporary political discourse.
Topic:
Governance, Leadership, Domestic Politics, Transition, and Labour Party
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

5. Montenegro after the General Elections: A New Chapter in Transition or Preservation of Status Quo?

Author:
Krševan Antun Dujmović
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for Development and International Relations (IRMO)
Abstract:
The general elections held in Montenegro on 30 August 2020 has once again drawn the attention of the Western Balkans to the smallest, measured by population, among seven nations that emerged after the breakup of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. This attention is due to a number of factors. Back in May of 2018 Montenegro has opened the last of the thirty-three chapters in the negotiation process with the European Union, making it a harbinger among Western Balkans nations on the path to Euro-Atlantic integrations, especially as the country had joined the North Atlantic Alliance in June 2017. Other countries in the region linger behind Montenegro – Albania and North Macedonia, both NATO members, are still waiting for the opening of the negotiations with the EU. Serbia has no intention to join NATO, and in spite of EU negotiations and ambitions, sees itself in balance between the West on one side, and Russia and China on the other. Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina are far from NATO membership and have merely the status of potential candidates for EU membership. This is why all eyes of the region and of the advocates of continuation of EU enragement policy are on Montenegro. The second factor are strong historical ties of this country on the Adriatic coast with its northern neighbor Serbia. Serbian minority makes up to one third of Montenegro’s population, and the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC- Srpska Pravoslavna Crkva) plays a vital role in Montenegrin society, as this country does not have its own autocephalous Church recognized by other Orthodox Churches in Eastern Christendom. This gives Serbia and the SPC a significant clout within borders of its southern neighbor. The third factor is the involvement of global players in this country. The United Sates has advocated strongly to include Montenegro in NATO in order to stretch the line of NATO’s southern flank in the Northern Mediterranean from the Iberian Peninsula to the west to Greece and Turkey in the east. On the other hand, Montenegro’s authorities accused Russia of meddling in the general elections held in October 2016 when the alleged coup d’état occurred on the election day. Many feared a similar scenario on the eve of 30 August 2020 election, fathoming the outbreak of riots and violence that could ignite the powder keg in the Balkans. Although none of these happened, Montenegro is not ceasing to be the subject of the geopolitical chessboard. Considering these factors, the attention of neighbors to the events in this Balkan country is understandable. The unfolding situation after the elections in which the government of Montenegro is backed by a very thin majority in the Parliament (Skupština Crne Gore) and with no clear vision nor strategy for further political and economic development of the country, is only fueling the wariness of its neighbors and of Brussels about Montenegro as a success story.
Topic:
NATO, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Elections, European Union, and Transition
Political Geography:
Europe, Balkans, and Montenegro

6. Turkey’s relations with the US and the EU at the beginning of the Biden presidency: Prospects for change?

Author:
Toni Alaranta
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
US-Turkey ties are strained because of conflicting interests in Syria and on a more fundamental level due to Turkey’s different interpretation of the ongoing global power shift, and its concurrent search for strategic autonomy and cooperation with Russia and China. EU-Turkey ties have long been dysfunctional, with the EU focusing on maintaining the refugee deal, while Turkey has become increasingly authoritarian and aggressive in its external relations, resulting in a permanent ‘wait-and-see’ approach by the EU. While the US and the EU have recently agreed that they should synchronize their stance on Turkey, both are also characterized by an increasingly feverish internal debate about how best to respond to Turkey’s behaviour. A genuine fresh start in Turkey-West relations is somewhat illusionary as most of the underlying problems are more likely increasing rather than decreasing, pointing to a more permanent dual-track policy of cooperation and containment, both by the US and the EU.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, European Union, Leadership, Conflict, and Transition
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, North America, and United States of America

7. Back from the brink: A better way for Europe to support Tunisia’s democratic transition

Author:
Tarek Megerisi
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
Tunisia is seeking a major IMF bailout loan – but the risks of securing it are almost as great as the risks of failing to, given the conditionality that would ensue. Democratic reforms in Tunisia have stalled, but post-revolution economic progress has never even begun. Tunisian politicians urgently need to combine receipt of a new loan and its accompanying austerity with economic reform and renewal to grow their way out of the crisis. The Tunisia policy of the EU and its member states is similarly stalled, but they can assist Tunisian leaders by providing new investment – and thereby reboot the democratic transition. Success in this endeavour could provide a model for political and economic reforms elsewhere in North Africa, which is in the EU’s interest as it pursues its goal of strategic autonomy in the face of other powers’ growing influence in the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, European Union, Democracy, and Transition
Political Geography:
Europe and Tunisia

8. Economics of Covid-19 and Brexit, revisited

Author:
Ben Chu, Meredith Crowley, Gemma Tetlow, Thomas Sampson, and Anand Menon
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
At this Isolation Insight webinar, panelists discussed the economics of the Covid-19 pandemic and the UK's exit from the EU, six months after lockdown began and with less than three months left of the transition period. Speakers: Ben Chu, economics editor, The Independent; Meredith Crowley, senior fellow, UK in a Changing Europe; Gemma Tetlow, chief economist, Institute for Government; Thomas Sampson, associate professor, London School of Economics; Chair: Anand Menon, director, UK in a Changing Europe
Topic:
Economics, European Union, Brexit, Transition, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

9. Belarus without Lukashenko: How it became a realistic scenario

Author:
Arkady Moshes and Ryhor Nizhnikau
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Alexander Lukashenko’s “victory” in the election cannot bridge the gap between the president and the modern part of Belarusian society. Turbulent times may lie ahead for Belarus. This will require the West to revise its current approach and invest more in supporting forces that want reforms and the country’s Europeanization.
Topic:
Reform, Elections, Europeanization, and Transition
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, and Belarus

10. President Zelensky’s first year leading Ukraine: A case of déjà vu

Author:
Ryhor Nizhnikau
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
During his first year as President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky prioritized presidential power-building. In order to do so, he relied heavily on the old system and established practices, such as “hands-on” management and the personalization of state agencies. Institution-building was replaced by the targeted fine-tuning of the dominant system. Some important reforms launched by the government in autumn 2019 were later stalled and reversed. As before, the adoption and implementation of comprehensive reforms will largely depend on Western pressure and conditionality. The major problem is that there are multiple centres of power in the country and the president’s actions only produce an illusion of control, while in reality the system is fragile and unstable. During the rest of his presidency, Volodymyr Zelensky will increasingly depend on oligarchs and govern through situational alliances. In exchange for their support, he may have to acquiesce to their continued dominance over the economy and the restoration of their influence in politics. Instability will intensify as his personal popularity wanes and economic and political crises deepen.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Leadership, Institutions, State Building, Transition, and Elites
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe