Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Political Geography Germany

11. Green Hydrogen: Implications for International Cooperation With Special Reference to South Africa

Author:
Andreas Stamm, Tilman Altenburg, Rita Strohmaier, Ece Oyan, and Katharina Thoms
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Green hydrogen – produced with renewable energy – is indispensable for the decarbonisation of economies, especially concerning “hard-to-abate” activities such as the production of steel, cement and fertilisers as well as maritime transport and aviation. The demand for green hydrogen is therefore booming. Currently, green hydrogen is far more expensive than fossil fuel-based alternatives, but major initiatives are underway to develop a global green hydrogen market and bring costs down. Green hydrogen is expected to become cost-competitive in the mid-2030s. Given their endowment with solar and wind energy, many countries in the Global South are well-positioned to produce low-cost green hydrogen and are therefore attracting investments. Whether and to what extent these investments will create value and employment for – and improve environmental conditions in – the host economies depends on policies. This discussion paper analyses the potential industrial development spillovers of green hydrogen production, distinguishing seven clusters of upstream and downstream industries that might receive a stimulus from green hydrogen. Yet, it also underlines that there is no automatism. Unless accompanied by industrial and innovation policies, and unless there are explicit provisions for using revenues for a Just Transition, hydrogen investments may lead to the formation of socially exclusive enclaves. The paper consists of two parts. Part A provides basic information on the emerging green hydrogen market and its technological ramifications, the opportunities for countries with abundant resources for renewable energy, how national policies can maximise the effects in terms of sustainable national development and how this can be supported by international cooperation. Part B delves into the specific case of South Africa, which is one of the countries that has an advanced hydrogen roadmap and hosts several German and international development projects. The country case shows how a national hydrogen strategy can be tailored to specific country conditions and how international cooperation can support its design and implementation.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Renewable Energy, and Hydrogen
Political Geography:
Africa, South Africa, and Germany

12. Development Finance at a Turning Point: Effects and Policy Recommendations

Author:
Kathrin Berensmann, Sabine Laudage Teles, Christoph Sommer, and Yabibal M. Walle
Publication Date:
01-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Development finance is at a turning point, as the macroeconomic environment has changed profoundly and the financing gap for low- and middle-income countries has widened. The events that led to this new situation are the multiple crises that the global economy is facing, such as the climate crisis, the COVID-19 crisis and the war in Ukraine. As a result, interest rates have risen sharply over the past year and are not expected to decline anytime soon. High interest rates further restrict low- and middle-income countries’ access to international financial markets by making borrowing more expensive. At the same time, debt levels in several countries are rising to levels that are almost impossible to repay. Poorer countries find themselves in a trap where financing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) becomes a distant goal for them. To “get back on track” in financing the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, a number of reform proposals have been put forward within several processes and initiatives, including the Financing for Development (FfD) process, the Bridgetown Initiative and the Macron-led Paris Summit. Despite being initiated by different actors, these proposals all highlight the importance of reforming the international financial architecture in view of the changed macroeconomic environment. The Hamburg Sustainability Conference in June 2024, the United Nation’s Summit of the Future in 2024 and the next FfD Conference in 2025 should be used to strengthen and accelerate ongoing reform processes and come up with new, innovative and bold proposals to reshape development finance in these challenging times. Against the background of the multiple crises and its effects, our key recommendations for the reform of development finance are as follows.
Topic:
Debt, Development, Reform, Finance, Sustainable Development Goals, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Germany and Global Focus

13. Good Practices in the Provision of Global Public Goods: How multilateral development banks build on global public goods in their operations

Author:
Johanna Neuhoff and Hannah Zick
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Oxford Economics
Abstract:
In our flagship report, ‘Multilateral Development Banks for Global Public Goods’, commissioned by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, Oxford Economics highlighted the positive role that the use of GPGs can play in preventing and addressing crises that cross national boundaries. As part of that work, we wanted to identify and share promising practices and good examples of how the provision of GPGs can be supported through international funding—and in particular through MDBs. We gathered a longlist of 99 examples of MDBs supporting GPG provision based on comprehensive desk research and interviews with over 30 key actors in the realm of project development. From this, we selected 20 case studies to carry out “deep dive” research to showcase good practices of provision of GPGs by MDBs based on whether the intervention: benefitted not only people inside the country of implementation but also beyond the country’s borders; supported the implementation of framework conditions that change the incentive structure for the provision of GPGs; could be replicated in other countries; and rated a good practice in reports or named a good practice by interview partners from MDBs. As a result, we gathered examples of GPG projects supported by MDBs and multilateral institutions at the country level that might not have been intended to only support GPG provision—such as those GPG projects mostly financed via Trust Funds and FIFs—but which also produced high GPG effects by maximising the synergies between national and global benefits. The case studies are designed to inform stakeholders from MDBs and receiving countries involved in the programming and project designing of development cooperation alike. The case studies showcase promising and highly replicable ways of supporting the provision of GPGs in the MDBs’ country engagement—considering both national and cross-country benefits of an intervention. Furthermore, valuable lessons can be learned on the institutional set-up, financing, quantification etc. concerning the support of GPGs by MDBs. They include examples of projects in sub-Saharan Africa, East Asia & Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and South Asia, and which covered issues such as climate and the environment, global public health, peace and security, financial resilience, and a fair international trading system. In a synthesis report, we set out 12 recommendations to organisations implementing GPGs to ensure they maximise the benefits on the ground, based on our findings from the analysis of the case studies. These range from using cost-benefit analysis and focusing on projects with high cross-country benefits to helping coordination of in-country provision and encouraging regional learning.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, International Trade and Finance, Institutions, Public Health, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
South Asia, East Asia, Germany, Latin America, Caribbean, Asia-Pacific, Global Focus, and Sub-Saharan Africa

14. Economic and Social Impacts of FDI in Central, East and Southeast Europe

Author:
Doris Hanzl-Weiss and Branimir Jovanovic
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This study assesses the economic and social impacts of foreign direct investment (FDI) in 17 economies in Central, East and Southeast Europe (CESEE). More precisely, we investigate how different FDI inflows have affected various economic and social indicators, such as GDP growth, labour market outcomes, and poverty and inequality, for the period since the fall of communism until 2020. We pay particular attention to FDI that originates from the EU, as well as FDI from Germany and Austria, in order to evaluate whether their effects are different from the effects of FDI from other places of origin. We also examine whether there are differences in the impacts of different types of FDI – equity capital, reinvested earnings and intra-company debt, as well as of FDI that goes to different sectors of the economy – the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors. We find that FDI inflows have had, in general, a positive effect on economic growth in CESEE, and that this effect has been particularly strong for German and Austrian FDI. For total FDI, higher inflows of 1 percentage point (pp) of GDP are associated with 0.19 pp higher GDP growth. For FDI from Germany and Austria, this effect is five times higher – FDI inflows of 1 pp of GDP have led to 0.9 pp higher GDP growth. The positive GDP effects have come from the higher consumption and exports that the FDI has induced. FDI inflows have also reduced unemployment and increased wages, but have had no effects on labour productivity. Total FDI has had only limited effects on inequality and poverty, but FDI from Germany and Austria has been found to reduce both inequality and poverty, likely because they have benefitted mainly lower-income persons. There are differences in the effects of the different types of FDI, with reinvested earnings and equity capital having in general more beneficial effects than intra-company loans. Also, FDI in different sectors of the economy has had different effects, with inflows to the secondary and tertiary sectors having greater effects than inflows to the primary sector. The policy implications of these results are that CESEE economies should not give up on their efforts to attract more FDI, but also that their endeavours should be more targeted, focusing on investments that have greater economic and social impacts. Moreover, foreign investment should not be criticised for the perhaps unsatisfactory economic and social performances of the economies from this region. Instead, the reasons for this should be sought in domestic factors and in the modest growth of the European Union during the past two decades.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Poverty, Foreign Direct Investment, Inequality, Economic Growth, and Unemployment
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, Germany, and Austria

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. Municipal Development Policy in Germany: Current Status and Prospects

Author:
Christopher Wingens, Paul Marschall, and Eva Dick
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
German municipalities are getting increasingly involved in development policy work in Germany and abroad, with the nature of that involvement becoming ever more diverse. However, very little is known about the background or the type of these activities. Against this backdrop, the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) has conducted a study of municipal development policy (MDP) in Germany. Financed by the Service Agency Communities in One World (SKEW) of Engagement Global, this research drew upon a previous study carried out by DIE in 2009 (Fröhlich & Lämmlin, 2009) with the aim of identifying the current status of and trends in development for this policy area. To this end, DIE collaborated with the German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval) to conduct a survey of municipalities throughout Germany. In addition, semi-structured qualitative interviews were held with representatives of municipalities and relevant national and federal-state institutions. As the results show, involvement in MDP on the part of German municipalities is increasing in the context of enabling national policies and changing frameworks for international cooperation (e.g. 2030 Agenda). Large municipalities engage far more often in development policy than small municipalities. The latter often focus on low-threshold activities with fewer requirements for project management, such as the promotion of fair trade. In a number of cases, small municipalities carry out projects based on inter-municipal cooperation. MDP covers many different topics, from information and education work to diverse forms of partnerships with municipalities in the Global South. The number and variety of stakeholders involved in the municipal administration partnerships are increasing, along with the functions they carry out. Municipalities serve as implementing agents, facilitators and networkers. They are partly motivated in their international work and corresponding activities by self-interest. Their involvement, for instance, may allow them to take on international responsibility or increase their appeal as an employer to new recruits. Development policy is a shared responsibility of the German national government, federal states and municipalities. MDP is a voluntary municipal activity and is thus not practised everywhere. Human resources are often insufficient and the required knowledge is difficult to obtain. In some cases, municipalities consider the expenditure associated with the management of MDP projects to be too high. Nonetheless, municipalities make a key contribution to transnational sustainability policy through their work, most especially by enabling global objectives to be localised and/or contextualised. One of the specific benefits of MDP is its proximity to citizens and direct contact with local stakeholders in Germany and abroad. However, when measured using conventional metrics and indicators for development cooperation (such as Official Development Assistance, ODA), the municipal contribution is still insufficiently discernible. It is important to continue providing support to municipalities, with as little red tape as possible, in order to fully exploit the potential MDP has in municipalities that are already involved in this work and those which are not yet involved.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Sustainability, and Municipalities
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

20. Disorder from Chaos: Why Europeans fail to promote stability in the Sahel

Author:
Andrew Lebovich
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR)
Abstract:
France, Germany, and Sahel countries launched the Sahel Alliance in 2017 with the aim of bringing together major international donors to better coordinate development assistance and other financing efforts for the region. The Alliance aimed to integrate security, development, and governance perspectives but has struggled to find coherence and effectiveness – although it has adopted some novel approaches. The worsening security situation in the Sahel led international actors to then set up new initiatives, including the Partnership for Security and Stability in the Sahel and, more recently, the Coalition for the Sahel. However, the relationship between these initiatives remains largely theoretical, with the practicalities of cooperation and burden sharing yet to be fully defined. These new initiatives risk privileging security solutions to complex problems, meaning that necessary governance reforms may fall by the wayside. This is despite widespread acknowledgement, including from senior French officials, that there is no purely military solution to the varied conflicts and challenges in the Sahel.
Topic:
Security, Development, Diplomacy, and Political stability
Political Geography:
Europe, France, Germany, North Africa, and Sahel