Number of results to display per page
Search Results
112. The Cyclical Behaviour of Fiscal Policy During the Covid-19 Crisis
- Author:
- Philipp Heimberger
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
- Abstract:
- This paper analyses the cyclicality of fiscal policy (discretionary versus automatic) for 28 advanced economies over 1995-2021 by paying special attention to the Covid-19 crisis. We find evidence that discretionary fiscal policy during the Covid-19 crisis (2020-2021) was significantly more countercyclical than before – in particular in the Eurozone. We do not find comparable evidence for more counter-cyclicality during the financial crisis or Euro crisis, which lends support to the argument that discretionary fiscal policy responded especially forceful to stabilise the economy during the Covid-19 crisis. Furthermore, automatic fiscal stabilisers contributed significantly to counter-cyclical stabilisation, although their performance over 2020-2021 was more in line with the past than for discretionary fiscal policy. Overall, fiscal policy in non-Eurozone advanced countries is more countercyclical than in the Eurozone. However, the cyclicality varies markedly across countries. Our findings shed light on how the cyclical behaviour of fiscal policy varies across countries and time.
- Topic:
- Financial Crisis, Crisis Management, Fiscal Policy, COVID-19, and Euro
- Political Geography:
- Europe
113. Ending the Destructive Sino-U.S. Interaction Over Taiwan: A Call for Mutual Reassurance
- Author:
- Michael D. Swaine
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- Recent years have witnessed steadily rising hostility and suspicion between the United States and China over each other’s approach vis-à-vis Taiwan. The unprecedentedly aggressive Chinese military exercises in response to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taipei this year indicated that the continued downward spiral in Sino-American relations over Taiwan would increasingly expose Washington and Beijing to risks of repeated crises with a potential of a dangerous armed conflict. This brief lays out the policy steps necessary to reverse this spiral of escalation.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Crisis Management, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America
114. The Worsening Taiwan Imbroglio: An Urgent Need for Effective Crisis Management
- Author:
- Michael D. Swaine
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
- Abstract:
- A severe diplomatic or military crisis over Taiwan is the issue that poses the greatest risk of war between the United States and China. Worryingly, the risk has increased in recent years with the deepening Sino-American rivalry amid intensifying conflicts of interest vis–à–vis Taiwan. Washington and Beijing must recognize the cycle of confrontational deterrence that drives it and take urgent measures to stop it. If the United States and China fail to take measures of mutual reassurance, the two countries will continue on the path to confrontation over Taiwan. This is particularly likely if their overall bilateral relationship continues to deteriorate. While acknowledging the likelihood of such a dangerous scenario, this brief affirms the need to improve crisis management on the Taiwan issue, outlines the major problems and limits of existing crisis management efforts, and offers concrete recommendations for improving the ability of both Washington and Beijing to more effectively manage future crises over Taiwan, as well as Sino-American crises in general.1
- Topic:
- Conflict Prevention, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, and Crisis Management
- Political Geography:
- China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America
115. Europe in a perfect storm
- Author:
- Jean-Dominique Giuliani and Pascale Joannin
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
- Abstract:
- The European Union continues to encounter greater and more violent [1] crises as well as strategic surprises. The Russian war in Ukraine is the latest one in a series. However, it would seem that there are no more crises, only the acceleration of unforeseen events and profound changes. After the subprime crisis, Greek finances, Syrian refugees, the Covid pandemic, the spectre of war is back on the continent. All of these challenges are putting a strain on most EU policies and yet they confirm the relevance of the European project. In the face of these events, the European Union has made more progress in a few months than in thirty years. But it is paying for its delays and hesitations. It must revise many of its policies and resolutely project itself into a new and more brutal global world.
- Topic:
- European Union, Crisis Management, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe
116. “It is high time to light up Europe’s stars again”
- Author:
- Paolo Levi
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
- Abstract:
- You grew up in Rome and have lived in Paris for several years, you are Italian and resolutely proEuropean. How do you reconcile these different identities? My three identities, Roman because in my country you are first and foremost linked to your city, but also Italian and European, are completely complementary. They are the same roots, the same culture that I find everywhere. In Paris everything speaks to me of Rome and in Rome everything speaks to me of Athens; when I see the Madeleine church I think of the Parthenon and the temples that were later built in Italy. There are, of course, differences between us, but these differences are our wealth because they are based on a foundation of common values. It is the same civilisational movement that began with Plato and has been passed down to us; you cannot sing the praises of Rabelais without knowing Dante, you cannot sing the praises of Kant without knowing Plato. I have been fortunate enough to travel a lot in Europe and I have seen that what unites us is much more important than what divides us. It is up to us to carry the message of Simone Veil who, after having lived through the horror of the camps, made the choice of Franco-German reconciliation and of European hope. With Putin’s war, the ideal of the European Union - «never again war» - is in now jeopardy. We cannot remain indifferent: it is up to each of us to defend the values that that are ours. The twelve stars of the European Union must show us the way.
- Topic:
- NATO, European Union, Crisis Management, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Italy
117. Enabling NATO’s Collective Defense: Critical Infrastructure Security and Resiliency (NATO COE-DAT Handbook 1)
- Author:
- Carl V. Evans, Chris Anderson, Malcom Baker, Ronald Bearse, and Salih Biçakci
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
- Abstract:
- In 2014 NATO’s Centre of Excellence-Defence Against Terrorism (COE-DAT) launched the inaugural course on “Critical Infrastructure Protection Against Terrorist Attacks.” As this course garnered increased attendance and interest, the core lecturer team felt the need to update the course in critical infrastructure (CI) taking into account the shift from an emphasis on “protection” of CI assets to “security and resiliency.” What was lacking in the fields of academe, emergency management, and the industry practitioner community was a handbook that leveraged the collective subject matter expertise of the core lecturer team, a handbook that could serve to educate government leaders, state and private-sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, academicians, and policymakers in NATO and partner countries. Enabling NATO’s Collective Defense: Critical Infrastructure Security and Resiliency is the culmination of such an effort, the first major collaborative research project under a Memorandum of Understanding between the US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute (SSI), and NATO COE-DAT. The research project began in October 2020 with a series of four workshops hosted by SSI. The draft chapters for the book were completed in late January 2022. Little did the research team envision the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February this year. The Russian occupation of the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant, successive missile attacks against Ukraine’s electric generation and distribution facilities, rail transport, and cyberattacks against almost every sector of the country’s critical infrastructure have been on world display. Russian use of its gas supplies as a means of economic warfare against Europe—designed to undermine NATO unity and support for Ukraine—is another timely example of why adversaries, nation-states, and terrorists alike target critical infrastructure. Hence, the need for public-private sector partnerships to secure that infrastructure and build the resiliency to sustain it when attacked. Ukraine also highlights the need for NATO allies to understand where vulnerabilities exist in host nation infrastructure that will undermine collective defense and give more urgency to redressing and mitigating those fissures.
- Topic:
- Security, NATO, Infrastructure, Cybersecurity, Alliance, Crisis Management, and Risk Assessment
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, North America, and United States of America
118. Geopolitical Struggle between Russia and Turkey: The Intersection of Ukraine and Syrian Crises
- Author:
- Rahman Dag
- Publication Date:
- 06-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development
- Institution:
- Centre for Strategic Research and Analysis (CESRAN)
- Abstract:
- As a new but uncertain international system has been operating for decades that can be regarded as a transition from unipolarity to something resembling multipolarity. Therefore, established and possible future great powers have been determining their foreign policies according to their future projections of the regional conflicts. This paper investigates Turkey and Russia’s stances in the Syrian and Ukrainian Crises. It might sound odd that Russia and Turkey are comparable in a struggle for the sphere of influence that intercepts each other. However, their good bilateral relations and different, even conflictual, approaches to regional and international issues provide a suitable ground to claim that a new international system is about to emerge. It will continue until the positions of established and newly emerged great powers are embedded. In practice, Russia's stance in the Ukrainian crisis and Turkey's stance in the Syrian crisis represent ontological threads to the vision of their own countries. However, they can still work together at a certain level because of third-party involvement in the issues
- Topic:
- Hegemony, Crisis Management, Humanitarian Crisis, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, Turkey, Ukraine, Middle East, and Syria
119. Governance for Resilience: How Can States Prepare for the Next Crisis?
- Author:
- Frances Brown
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The pandemic has presented policymakers with daunting, interlinked, and often unprecedented challenges. From health emergencies that also upend economies to trade disruptions that also pose new multilateral diplomatic dilemmas, the pandemic has generated challenges that seem exceptional in both scale and degree of interconnection. Although the coronavirus pandemic has generated a dizzying series of harsh social, political, and economic firsts, such dilemmas will not be the last. Trend lines around a series of domestic and multinational governance issues, including climate change, migration, rising geopolitical tensions, and citizen alienation from governing institutions, suggest that complex, interlinked crises will be features of the future. While national and multilateral policymakers should work to alleviate the drivers of such crises, they must also strive to prepare their countries to adapt and recover from complex shocks. In short, they must try to build resilience. The need for resilience will be especially acute in developing and fragile states. These countries will need to respond to compounding shocks across multiple domains, without the head start that their developed-world counterparts enjoy. Equally, donors and policymakers from the Global North must also elevate resilience and adaptation as key components of their approaches to supporting fragile states. This call to bolster countries’ resilience is hardly new. Even before the pandemic, the policy arena featured increasing calls for resilience; now, the chorus has become almost deafening. Recent seminal policy and analytic documents—including the U.S. National Intelligence Council’s flagship report,1 the UK’s Integrated Review,2 and the U.S. Interim National Security Strategy3—have underscored that states’ resilience and capacity for adaptation will be key to their future success in the geopolitical arena. In donors’ peacebuilding and development policies, high-level emphasis on resilience has also swelled over the past few years, including in official communications from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development,4 the United States government,5 and the European Union.6 In some development practitioner and civil society circles, the need for resilience is so frequently invoked that it sometimes borders on cliché.7 The increasingly ubiquitous recommendation to “bolster resilience” is valuable for at least two related reasons. First, it offers a more specific strategic objective than conversations around “state fragility” writ large, which have often been too broad to generate concrete policy responses. Second, recent, failed international statebuilding projects have underscored that state fragility is not to be “fixed”—instead, it is to be managed and mitigated.8 The emphasis on resilience thus marks a helpful shift away from maximalist policy framing and toward a more attainable one. But concrete insights on how developing or fragile countries actually achieve resilience are less clear and less common. Given the broad consensus that state fragility is deeply linked to governance, for many policymakers, good governance is central. To be sure, many other factors beyond governance—including demographic, geographic, military, and economic ones—affect a state’s resilience. But a country’s governance and political institutions generally undergird all other dynamics in determining how effectively that state can bounce back from setbacks. What exactly does the concept of “good governance for resilience” entail in practice? This paper surveys the evidence. Below, it reviews the governance-related characteristics and capabilities that affect a country’s resilience. For the purposes of this paper, resilience at the national level can be understood as a country’s capacity to respond to, adapt to, and grow from stresses and shocks.9 Resilience focuses on bolstering the overall performance of a system in the face of unpredictable and often interconnected hazards, making it different from risk management, which relates to specific hazards.10 A country’s resilience depends on the internal characteristics that allow for states and their institutions to navigate a variety of disruptions.11 An overarching insight from the evidence is that governance for resilience is complex and often multidirectional. Several characteristics, such as decentralization, have an ambiguous effect on resilience: they enable a country to withstand some setbacks but leave it more vulnerable in other ways. Still other characteristics—including whether a country is a democracy or an authoritarian political system—do not appear have a clear-cut effect on resilience. In contrast, a few governance “super-factors”—such as control of corruption, societal trust, and high quality political leadership—are exceptionally powerful in enabling a country to augment its resilience through multiple pathways. Finally, this paper considers the broader implications of governance for resilience as a policy agenda. The framing of bolstering countries’ resilience is a valuable one, but it also raises several vexing trade-offs and dilemmas. In particular, it prompts the question of whose resilience, in specific, it refers to, since resilience of state institutions does not always mean resilience of all parts of the population. Looking ahead, the policy refrain of “building resilience” in fragile and developing states, appealing though it is, should be refined to encompass these thorny realities.
- Topic:
- Governance, Crisis Management, Resilience, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
120. North Korea as a complex humanitarian emergency: Assessing food insecurity
- Author:
- Marcus Noland
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- North Korea is a complex humanitarian emergency with food insecurity at its core. As of August 2022, both quantity and price data point to a deteriorating situation, made worse by the regime’s self-isolating response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine. Food availability has likely fallen below minimum human needs and on one metric is the worst since the 1990s famine. Food insecurity in North Korea is not only a humanitarian issue but also a strategic one. In this context, the diplomatic leverage conferred by aid is unclear, nor is North Korea’s priority as a recipient, in light of competing needs elsewhere. Resolution of North Korea’s chronic food insecurity would require changes in the regime’s domestic and foreign policy commitments, but this seems unlikely due to enablement by China and Russia.
- Topic:
- Food Security, Crisis Management, Humanitarian Crisis, COVID-19, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Asia and North Korea