Search

Begin New Search Topic Institutions Political Geography Global Focus

1. The Role of Values for Social Cohesion: Theoretical Explication and Empirical Exploration

Author:
Daniel Nowack and Sophia Schoderer
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Development Institute (DIE)
Abstract:
Shared values are deemed necessary as a solid foundation for social cohesion by commentators and observers in many countries. However, when examining what kind of values this is based on, answers often come down to platitudes and national clichés. This discussion paper offers some clarification through both a theoretical explication and an empirical exploration concerning the general role of values for social cohesion. Values are notions about desirable, trans-situational end-states and behaviours. They fall into two categories, individual and societal values. We provide a critical discussion of the most prominent conceptualisations and their operationalisation in the social sciences. Values affect social cohesion in three possible pathways: First, when they are shared; second, when they promote behaviour per se conducive to social cohesion and third, through their effect on policy choice and institutional design. We review evidence provided by the research literature for each of these pathways. We further explore the third pathway by deriving from the research literature the conjecture that a cultural value emphasis on egalitarianism makes a universalistic scope of welfare institutions more likely, which in turn increases social and political trust. We first examine this conjecture with a series of regression models, and then run a mediation analysis. The results show that (1.) egalitarian values are moderately strongly and positively linked to universalistic welfare institutions, but that (2.) welfare institutions mediate the association of egalitarian values with social trust only to a small extent and that (3.) more universalistic welfare institutions counteract a negative association between egalitarian values and institutional trust.
Topic:
Culture, Institutions, Values, Welfare, and Social Cohesion
Political Geography:
Germany and Global Focus

2. Multipolarity in Practice: Understanding Russia’s Engagement With Regional Institutions

Author:
Paul Stronski and Richard Sokolsky
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Over the past two decades, and especially since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, the Kremlin has intensified its engagement with international institutions. This paper evaluates the drivers of this involvement, Russian views of three of these organizations, and Moscow’s success in achieving its objectives.
Topic:
International Relations, Regional Cooperation, Multilateralism, and Institutions
Political Geography:
Russia and Global Focus

3. COVID-19 and Peace: Preparedness for the post-pandemic recovery

Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace
Abstract:
The journey out of this global recession will be long and arduous. However two factors may assist countries along this path. The first is high levels of Positive Peace, guaranteeing effective institutions, social cohesion and transparent, representative governments. The second is favourable economic conditions before the onset of the pandemic.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Economics, Health, Global Recession, Violence, Economic Policy, Institutions, Peace, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Integrated Policymaking: Choosing an Institutional Design for Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Author:
Anita Breuer, Julia Leininger, and Jale Tosun
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
German Development Institute (DIE)
Abstract:
Implementing the 2030 Agenda in an integrated way poses new challenges to political institutions and processes. In order to exploit synergies and to mitigate trade-offs between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), innovative governance approaches are needed. National bodies to coordinate SDG implementation were being created as of late 2015. As a basis for future analyses on effectiveness, it is important to know if, and which, institutional designs are in place to implement the SDGs and why they were chosen. Against this background, this Discussion Paper analyses how political factors influence institutional design choices when it comes to implementing the SDGs. The aim of this paper is twofold: First, it seeks to assess governments’ proposals for institutional designs for SDG implementation at the national level and to identify patterns of institutional designs. It does so by analysing and coding the Voluntary National Reviews from 2016 and 2017 of 62 signatory states, including OECD and none-OECD countries from all world regions and income groups. Second, it aims to explain which political and socio-economic factors shaped these institutional designs. The empirical analysis shows that the majority of countries have opted for a design that promotes political support at the highest level and cross-sectoral, horizontal integration, but has significant shortcomings in terms of social inclusiveness and vertical coordination across different levels of government. When asking which determinants shape these patterns, our findings reveal that horizontal integration becomes more likely with higher socio-economic development. Moreover, we find that vertical integration and societal integration are interdependent and mutually enforcing. Based on our findings, we formulate policy recommendations regarding the institutional requirements for integrated SDG implementation.
Topic:
Development, Sustainable Development Goals, and Institutions
Political Geography:
Germany and Global Focus

5. Democracy Support and Peaceful Democratisation after Civil War

Author:
Karina Mross
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Development Institute (DIE)
Abstract:
Evidence exists that democracies are particularly stable, yet also that processes of democratisation are highly susceptible to conflict, especially if democratisation occurs in the aftermath of violent conflict. New research from the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE) indicates that external democracy support can help mitigate the destabilising effects of post-conflict democratisation. Since the 1990s, democracy support has been integral to most peacebuilding efforts. Supporting free and fair elections or a vibrant media seems well-suited for fostering peace: Democratic institutions can actively deal with societal conflicts, in sharp contrast to authoritarian regimes, which often rely on repression. However, altering power relations through more political competition can also trigger power struggles, which newly emerging democratic institutions may have difficulty containing. Therefore, questions arise regarding countries that have embarked on a process of democratisation after civil war: Can democracy support help to mitigate destabilising effects, or does it reinforce them? If it can foster peace, how should it be designed in order to avoid renewed violence? The wisdom or folly of supporting democracy to build peace after civil war has caused controversy, yet has rarely been tested empirically. This briefing paper summarises findings from DIE research that addresses this gap.
Topic:
Civil War, Democratization, Conflict, Institutions, and Peace
Political Geography:
Germany and Global Focus

6. Global Peace Index 2019: Measuring peace in a complex world

Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace
Abstract:
This is the thirteenth edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI), which ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their level of peacefulness. Produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), the GPI is the world’s leading measure of global peacefulness. This report presents the most comprehensive data-driven analysis to date on peace, its economic value, trends, and how to develop peaceful societies. The GPI covers 99.7 per cent of the world’s population, using 23 qualitative and quantitative indicators from highly respected sources, and measures the state of peace using three thematic domains: the level of Societal Safety and Security; the extent of Ongoing Domestic and International Conflict; and the degree of Militarisation. In addition to presenting the findings from the 2019 GPI, this year’s report includes analysis of trends in Positive Peace: the attitudes, institutions, and structures that create and sustain peaceful societies. It looks at the relationship between the actual peace of a country, as measured by the GPI, and Positive Peace, and how a deficit of Positive Peace is often a predictor of future increases in violent conflict. It also looks at the dynamic relationship between changes in Positive Peace and changes in the economy.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Peace Studies, Peacekeeping, Military Affairs, Political structure, Conflict, Violence, Institutions, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. SDG16+ Progress Report 2019: A comprehensive global audit of progress on available SDG16 indicators

Publication Date:
03-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Economics & Peace
Abstract:
This report presents the third in a series of yearly reports, produced by the Institute for Economics & Peace on Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG16), which measures peace, justice and strong institutions. Experience from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) shows that development is hindered by low peace and weak institutions. As such, in the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, SDG16 is considered fundamental to achievements in many of the other SDGs.
Topic:
Economics, Millennium Development Goals, Sustainable Development Goals, Institutions, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Cohesive Institutions and Political Violence

Author:
Thiemo Fetzer and Stephan Kyburz
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Can institutionalized transfers of resource rents be a source of civil conflict? Are cohesive institutions better at managing conflicts over distribution? We exploit exogenous variation in revenue disbursements to local governments and use new data on local democratic institutions in Nigeria to answer these questions. There is a strong link between rents and conflict far away from the location of the resource. Conflict over distribution is highly organized, involving political militias, and concentrated in the extent to which local governments are non-cohesive. Democratically elected local governments significantly weaken the causal link between rents and political violence. Elections produce more cohesive institutions, and vastly limit the extent to which distributional conflict between groups breaks out following shocks to the rents. Throughout, we confirm these findings using individual level survey data.
Topic:
Political Violence, Violence, Institutions, and Human Resources
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Sources of Comparative Advantage in Services: Institution vs. Social Capital

Author:
Nakgyoon Choi and Soonchan Park
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Previous studies that have identified the impacts of institutions or cultural traits on comparative advantage focused on goods trade, but not services trade. In contrast to the rapid increase in trade in services, empirical examina-tion on sources of comparative advantage in services trade remains limited. This paper attempts to fill this gap by investigating empirically the impacts of institution as well as social capital on comparative advantage in services trade. Services are exposed to relatively more pre-choice risks than goods, because it is difficult to obtain information on the quality of services before the con-sumer decides to purchase. In addition, trade in services involved in global value chains possibly takes on the risks of contract breach by other firms along the same value chains. As a result, the transaction risks for trade in ser-vices are higher than for trade in goods. Using the World Input Output Da-tabase, we estimate the importance of social capital for comparative ad-vantage in services. We find that countries with more social capital tend to specialize in the production of contract-intensive services. We also find that social capital rather than institution matters for comparative advantage in ser-vices.
Topic:
Economic Policy, Institutions, Services, Trade, and Social Capital
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. Democracy’s “Near Misses”

Author:
Tom Ginsburg and Aziz Huq
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Democracy
Institution:
National Endowment for Democracy
Abstract:
Democracies can collapse or erode beyond repair, but they can also suffer substantial yet “non-fatal” deterioration in the quality of democratic institutions, and then experience a rebound. Such “near misses” have received little or no attention in the new wave of scholarship on why democracies die (or survive). This article develops the concept of a democratic near miss. It first considers numerical metrics of democratic quality as a means of identifying near misses, but finds that these metrics provide inconsistent and conflicting guidance. Instead, this essay uses a case study method—focusing on Finland in 1930, Colombia in 2010, and Sri Lanka in 2015—to capture the dynamics of democratic near misses. These cases suggest that nonmajoritarian actors, including political-party elites and unelected judges and bureaucrats, have a critical role to play in averting democratic erosion.
Topic:
Culture, Military Affairs, Democracy, and Institutions
Political Geography:
Finland, Sri Lanka, Colombia, and Global Focus