Search

Begin New Search Topic Multilateralism Political Geography Global Focus

21. Transparency in multilateral climate governance: Ranking countries by the Climate Transparency Adherence Index

Author:
Romain Weikmans and Antto Vihma
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Reporting and review arrangements are often portrayed as vital for keeping countries informed about each other’s climate intentions and actions. They are set in order to enhance accountability and mutual trust, ultimately securing more ambitious climate actions. This Briefing Paper provides an updated analysis of state engagement with the recent reporting requirements under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The analysis shows that the performance of countries continues to vary greatly. The full data of the research is available to be requested from the authors. Understanding current trends of engagement with reporting is crucial for informing the effective implementation of the Paris Agreement. Indeed, the Agreement calls for an “Enhanced Transparency Framework” to be implemented by 2024. This represents a major ramping up of transparency obligations, especially for developing countries. Significant challenges lie ahead in the implementation of ever more stringent transparency requirements. Political reluctance to report on national climate actions (or lack thereof) to multilateral institutions such as the UNFCCC is a likely obstacle to the functioning of the new transparency framework. Technical obstacles may also limit the disclosure of information.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Governance, Multilateralism, and Transparency
Political Geography:
Global Focus

22. Policy Options for an Equitable Re-globalization

Author:
Constantine Michalopoulos
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
Developing countries made impressive gains in reducing poverty and global income inequality in the past half century, many riding the wave of globalization. But the dozen years that followed the 2008 financial crisis witnessed a deterioration of global commitments to a more equitable economic order made in the early years of the 21st century. The pandemic undermined development prospects, intensified pre-existing anti-globalization sentiments, and raised questions about the effectiveness of the international institutions within which developing countries achieved great progress. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine created a major geopolitical split and contributed to large increases in energy and food prices with disastrous results for developing countries, many of which were just recovering from the increased poverty created by the pandemic. This paper sets out an agenda for what I call a more equitable re-globalization. This has several parts: addressing climate change, providing economic assistance to help reduce poverty in low income countries, strengthening the social safety net, limiting the power of MNCs, and reestablishing an effective multilateral trading system. The potential calamities of future pandemics and the threats posed by climate change require countries to submerge narrow national political objectives and develop a collaborative global multilateral approach. The last part of the paper discusses the steps the international community must take to revitalize multilateralism to enable it to cope with global challenges effectively and equitably.
Topic:
Globalization, Poverty, Income Inequality, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

23. Is There a Better Way to Use Global Reserves?

Author:
Mark Plant
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Global reserves can serve as a global public good, facilitating the short-term global recovery from the economic impacts of the pandemic and Russian invasion of Ukraine, as well as the longer-term global transition to a sustainable and equitable economic future. Strategic allocation of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) could facilitate sharing of global reserves with low- and middle-income countries to the mutual benefit of advanced and developing countries. This will require the development of new SDR sharing mechanisms, in which multilateral development banks could be instrumental. Other SDR reforms should also be pursued.
Topic:
Development, Multilateralism, Sustainability, and Banking
Political Geography:
Global Focus

24. Country Platforms and Delivery of Global Public Goods

Author:
Daouda Sembene, Nancy Lee, and Mark Plant
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
This paper discusses three potential requirements for country platforms to facilitate effective delivery of GPGs. We propose that existing country platforms be repurposed to coordinate the contribution of domestic and external stakeholders to GPG delivery efforts at the country level. For this proposed approach to be successful, an explicit link must be introduced between country-level efforts and global initiatives to provide GPGs. There is also merit in setting up country and global coordination mechanisms, with relevant agencies assigned to operate them both at the national and international levels. Using relevant country platforms, we suggest that international financial institutions (IFIs) such as the IMF and multilateral development banks (MDBs) be mandated with helping developing countries meet the financing needs associated with the provision of GPGs. In addition, technical support from the IFIs should be put on the table to improve the effectiveness of developing countries’ contribution to GPG delivery. In this regard, MDBs can and must play a central role in developing capacities in these countries as part of their own contribution to GPG delivery. At the same time, securing the contribution of civil society and the private sector to GPG delivery efforts is essential given the magnitude of potential financing needs.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Finance, Multilateralism, IMF, and Public Goods
Political Geography:
Global Focus

25. Multilateralism Index: Pilot Report

Author:
International Peace Institute
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Peace Institute (IPI)
Abstract:
In the past several years, there has been a much-discussed rise in strain on multilateralism. However, there have been few efforts to quantifiably assess the state of the multilateral system. This Multilateralism Index (MI) report is the first known attempt to do so. It focuses on developments in the system over the past decade, providing a snapshot of its relative strength in 2020 compared to 2010. It seeks to answer questions including: What is the state of the multilateral system? What is working? What is not? And how has the multilateral system changed over time? The MI examines five domains of multilateral coordination: Peace and Security, Human Rights, Environment, Public Health, and Trade. Each domain is evaluated across three dimensions: Participation, Performance, and Inclusivity. Analysis of sixty-five indicators across these domains and dimensions reveals several trends in multilateral cooperation over the past decade: Participation scores for Human Rights, Public Health, and Trade have improved, while the scores for Peace and Security and Environment have deteriorated. Performance scores have deteriorated in four out of five domains. Inclusivity scores have improved across all five domains. These trends shed light on the nature of the crisis of multilateralism. Rather than decreased international cooperation and widespread exit from multilateral institutions, we are seeing a battle over the nature and purpose of the multilateral system—not decay, but transformation. The MI provides a basis for tracking this transformation and informing decision making on the future of multilateralism.
Topic:
Security, Environment, Human Rights, Multilateralism, Peace, Trade, and Public Health
Political Geography:
Global Focus

26. To Prevent the Collapse of Biodiversity, the World Needs a New Planetary Politics

Author:
Stewart Patrick
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The planet is in the midst of an environmental emergency, and the world is only tinkering at the margins. Humanity’s addiction to fossil fuels and voracious appetite for natural resources are accelerating climate change and degrading ecosystems on land and sea, threatening the integrity of the biosphere and thus the survival of our own species. Given these risks, it is shocking that the multilateral system has failed to respond more forcefully. Belatedly, the United States, the EU, the UK, and some other advanced market democracies have adopted more aggressive greenhouse gas reduction targets, but their ability to deliver is suspect, while critical emerging economies like China and India have resisted accelerating their own decarbonization.1 Even more concerning, existing multilateral commitments, including on climate change, fail to address the other half of the planet’s ecological crisis: collapsing biodiversity, which the leaders of the Group of 7 nations rightly call an “equally important existential threat.”
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Politics, Multilateralism, and Biodiversity
Political Geography:
Global Focus

27. Opportunities for Increased Multilateral Engagement with B3W

Author:
Conor M. Savoy and Shannon McKeown
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
As the world continues to rapidly digitize and grapples with the short- and long-term impacts of climate change, new forms of innovative and resilient infrastructure are increasingly necessary. The estimated $3.3 trillion annual gap in infrastructure investment cannot be paid for with official development assistance (ODA) alone but will require significant private sector financing and local government resources. A coordinated, multi-stakeholder effort that includes governments, the private sector, and civil society is needed to leverage all available resources and funding to address these challenges as well as implement the UN quality infrastructure agenda.2 G7 countries—Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States—have recognized the need for a global infrastructure plan that responds to the problems of today and proactively plans for the issues of tomorrow. In June 2021, the G7 unveiled the Build Back Better World (B3W) initiative, which seeks to leverage the private sector for $40 trillion in infrastructure investment by 2035 under the initiative’s four pillars: (1) healthcare, (2) gender equality and equity, (3) climate and environment, and (4) digital technology. The initiative also includes several economic and trade provisions to promote greater connectivity and allow countries to benefit from this investment. The B3W strategy is designed to be inclusive and rely upon input from a whole spectrum of local organizations, donors, and recipient countries to define an infrastructure strategy, projects, and implementation priorities. The guiding principles of B3W include value-driven high standards, transparency, climate-compatible projects, private sector investment, and a commitment to multilateralism. B3W shares standards with and builds upon two previous initiatives: the Blue Dot Network (BDN) and the Better Utilization of Investment Leading to Development (BUILD) Act. BDN is a U.S.-led effort that certifies infrastructure projects against robust criteria and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards. The BUILD Act is a bipartisan bill that created the U.S. Development Finance Corporation (USDFC) to introduce private sector investment in low- and lower-middle-income countries. These two initiatives have thankfully laid the groundwork for B3W’s objectives and principles. Given the initiative’s infrastructure focus, B3W is being positioned as an affirmative alternative to other state-directed infrastructure financing models, such as China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Its emphasis on good governance, consideration of environmental and social impacts, and adherence to transparency is meant to draw a stark contrast with other models that involve more questionable labor and environmental standards, alleged corruption, and murky debt financing. B3W has an opportunity to distinguish itself as an important alternative through high standards and the buy-in of multilateral partners and stakeholders. The United States can be the driving force of this engagement through its unique ties to the UN system, including being the largest member country donor. Partnering with specialized UN agencies, committees, and related entities that work in the various B3W pillars will (1) make B3W more of a legitimate initiative with a greater global collaboration; (2) better position B3W projects to succeed with the right resources, networks, and capital; and (3) fill the knowledge and resource gap from the private sector.
Topic:
Infrastructure, Governance, Multilateralism, and Transparency
Political Geography:
Global Focus

28. Multilateral Trade Arrangements and Climate Provisions

Author:
Emily Benson, Sparsha Janardhan, and William Alan Reinsch
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
This new paper from the CSIS Scholl Chair in International Business assesses sectoral standards bodies, evaluates environmental provisions in trade agreements, and explores opportunities for addressing climate concerns in newer trade arrangements, such as the recent announcement to negotiate a deal on green steel and aluminum between the European Union and the United States. As this paper seeks to demonstrate, binding agreements with clear enforcement mechanisms are best suited for ensuring that parties meet their climate change obligations as outlined in various bilateral or multilateral agreements. Since concluding agreements that are both binding and have clear enforcement capabilities are not always possible or politically desirable, pursuing a mixed approach—one based on best practices from a diverse set of trade architectures—may be the most viable approach that produces the most tangible outcomes. This paper evaluates climate provisions in trade architectures and makes recommendations for including climate provisions, including sectoral standards, in trade arrangements in a way that encourages increased multilateral collaboration in a WTO-compliant manner.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

29. Convergence and Divergence: Multilateral Trade and Climate Agendas

Author:
William Alan Reinsch and Emily Benson
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
If the international community wants to make meaningful progress ahead of the 2030 deadline—which critics argue is still too late to avert global catastrophe—major global players should work together to reduce emissions at home and abroad. This paper discusses the politics of climate policy in the United States and how it is influenced by relationships with the European Union and China. It analyzes these international relationships through specific policies, namely subsidies, and assesses their reduction or removal in some cases and their reallocations in others. It also evaluates the politics and policy implications of carbon border adjustments, including their compliance with existing WTO rules. These trade policies allude to domestic industrial policies and how they can be adjusted to better combat climate change while complying with existing trade rules. In outlining policy options for the United States’ trade agenda, including how the European Union and China factor into these options, the paper assesses the probability that certain climate policies will ultimately materialize. The paper argues that unilateralism is insufficient and counterproductive in both trade and climate and that only through multilateral, legally compliant policy convergence can countries stave off environmental and economic collapse.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Trade and Finance, Multilateral Relations, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

30. WTO 2025: Getting back to the negotiating table

Author:
Alan Wm. Wolff
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
The negotiation of multilateral agreements has stalled at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The action is among groups of like-minded WTO Members, either regionally or in open plurilateral agreements (OPAs) in Geneva at the WTO. There is currently no consensus among WTO Members to include plurilateral agreements officially in the set of WTO agreements. Many additional challenges require multilateral—that is, global—agreements: the pandemic, food security, and climate change, among them. A breakthrough is needed to get WTO negotiations back on track.
Topic:
Climate Change, Treaties and Agreements, Food Security, Multilateralism, COVID-19, and WTO
Political Geography:
Global Focus