Number of results to display per page
Search Results
332. Implicit Subsidies for Infrastructure and Their Implications for Contingent Liabilities in Selected East Asian Countries
- Author:
- Astrid Dita and Sandy Maulana
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
- Abstract:
- A government's investment decision for infrastructure development is a form of budget commitment which results in direct liabilities and possible contingent liabilities. The latter is often overlooked when the project preparation is weak where potential risks are insufficiently identified and mitigated and its impact on budget sustainability may worsen in the absence of sound surveillance. Infrastructure projects may thus lead to unmitigated fiscal risk without proper investment decision-making and monitoring framework particularly in the presence of less-than-mature fiscal systems and low public investment management capacity (e.g. as demonstrated by the inability to develop sound project business cases or distinguish project financing from funding issues).
- Topic:
- Development, Infrastructure, Governance, and Investment
- Political Geography:
- Asia and ASEAN
333. The ABCs of Sovereign Debt Relief
- Author:
- Rakan Aboneaaj, Jocilyn Estes, and Clemence Landers
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development (CGD)
- Abstract:
- We are living in a time when many countries face heightened debt vulnerabilities. Already high before the pandemic, debt levels reached a 50-year peak following the growth in government spending to combat COVID-19. Debt is not inherently bad; borrowing can allow countries to finance vital government investment. But unsustainable levels of debt can have devastating consequences for a country’s population, crowding out government spending on even basic necessities including food, medicine, and fuel imports. In Sri Lanka, for example, 71 percent of government revenue was spent on debt service before the country defaulted. Even where the tradeoff is not so dire, unsustainable debt service can limit productive investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other sectors, hampering the economic growth necessary to reduce a country’s debt burden. After a decade-long period of low borrowing costs, a confluence of rising interest rates, inflation, and commodity shocks have raised the likelihood of overlapping debt crises in developing countries. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) now estimates that 30 percent of emerging market countries and 60 percent of low-income countries could face trouble paying down their debts or will soon. There is no international bankruptcy mechanism for countries that default on their external obligations. Instead, countries have historically depended on a patchwork of precedents, contracts, and conventions to bring creditors to the table for debt relief negotiations. The United States has a legacy as the lead architect of large global debt relief initiatives, from the Brady Bond plan for Latin America to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative that kickstarted debt relief for poor countries in the 1990s. However, the global creditor landscape has changed significantly over the past decade. Low-income sovereigns’ largest creditors today—China and private bondholders—operate under much different principles than the leading bilateral creditors of the past, making the traditional norms and structures less effective for present debt challenges. The objective of the international financial architecture—historically overseen by the IMF and its shareholders— will be to corral these new creditors into a cooperative arrangement to deliver on debt relief.
- Topic:
- Debt, Development, Governance, Credit, and Sovereign Debt
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
334. Breakthrough to Policy Use: Reinvigorating Impact Evaluation for Global Development
- Author:
- Julia Kaufman, Amanda Glassman, Ruth Levine, and Janeen Madan Keller
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development (CGD)
- Abstract:
- In 2006, when a CGD working group published its report When Will We Ever Learn? Improving Lives Through Impact Evaluation, very few social programs benefitted from studies that could determine whether they actually make a difference. Since then, there has been tremendous progress in harnessing better evidence to inform public policy decision making, especially from impact evaluations of programs in low- and middle-income countries. Impact evaluation is a rigorous approach that establishes the attributable net impact of a project or program, making it uniquely well suited to inform decision making about resource allocation, program design, and scale up or drawdown. But the COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on an unfinished agenda, underscoring the need for high-quality, timely, and context-specific evidence. The pandemic has demonstrated the cost in lives and livelihoods when policymakers make decisions based on incomplete or outdated evidence and data. Approximately 15 million more deaths took place in 2020 and 2021 than would have occurred in the absence of COVID-19, and cumulative economic losses from the pandemic are expected to reach 13.8 trillion. Given the potential real-world benefits, why have decision makers within governments, aid agencies, multilateral organizations, and NGOs not yet fully harnessed the value of evidence—including from impact evaluations—for better public policies? Looking ahead, how can the development community renew momentum and broaden bases of support for impact evaluation and the wider evidence agenda? In response to these questions and building on progress to date, CGD launched the Working Group on New Evidence Tools for Policy Impact. The working group aimed to develop a renewed agenda for investments in impact evaluation and related evidence systems to enhance their value for policy use. It brought together a diverse group of policymakers and experts to review recent progress and examine how to address remaining obstacles to the use and utility of evidence for global development, with a focus on impact evaluation. This brief summarizes the final report of the working group. The report collates resources and insights on progress in implementing and using impact evaluations for decision making and proposes five ways to improve impact evaluation funding and practice, directed to the development community—government policymakers; other multilateral, bilateral, and philanthropic funders; researchers, and NGOs
- Topic:
- Development, Governance, Leadership, NGOs, and Impact Evaluation
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
335. The Future of the European Financial Architecture for Development
- Author:
- Mikaela Gavas
- Publication Date:
- 05-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development (CGD)
- Abstract:
- In “The European Financial Architecture for Development: evolution or revolution,” Mikaela Gavas sets out the current European Development finance landscape, explaining the key players involved and highlights the challenges with the current systems, and underlines the importance of the EU and its various instruments.
- Topic:
- Regional Cooperation, Governance, European Union, and European Parliament
- Political Geography:
- Europe
336. Mozambique: A Comparative Study of the Foreign Policy of the Samora Machel and Joaquim Chissano Governments
- Author:
- Ercilio Neves Brandao Langa
- Publication Date:
- 08-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- AUSTRAL: Brazilian Journal of Strategy International Relations
- Institution:
- Postgraduate Program in International Strategic Studies, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
- Abstract:
- The article analyses Mozambique’s foreign policy during the governments of Samora Machel (1975-1986) and Joaquim Chissano (1987-2005), the first two governments in the post-independence period. Mozambique is a peripheral country in the hierarchy of the international capitalist division of labour, specializing in the production of raw materials, with a poorly diversified economy that exports primary products. In the hierarchy of the international system, it can be classified as a vulnerable or fragile State, with a tendency towards authoritarian regimes, experiencing conflicts and violent wars of groups that compete with the State. Despite being from the same party, the Samora and Chissano governments had different political-economic and ideological characteristics that are reflected in Mozambican foreign policy, being influenced by the fate of the Cold War. In the foreign policy decision-making process in Mozambique, the State responded more to external and international pressures than to internal inputs. Foreign policy was rarely the result of or influenced by demands from Mozambican civil society, even though most decisions were taken on behalf of the people.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Civil Society, and Governance
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Mozambique
337. From Warlords to Statelords: Armed Groups and Power Trajectories in Libya and Yemen
- Author:
- Eleanore Ardemagni and Federica Saini Fasanotti
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)
- Abstract:
- Armed groups play a central role in Libya and Yemen. Pervading weak and contested institutions, they have gradually brought their survival, profit and governance strategies under the state umbrella: warlords have become the new lords of the state. Armed groups control most of the energy revenues, critical infrastructure, smuggling and illicit trafficking. Their leaders are multifaceted: they are simultaneously military commanders, tribal chiefs, politicians and businessmen. Combining comparative analysis and case studies, this Report sheds light on the “economic face” of the armed groups and their power trajectories. How do armed groups build networks of profit and loyalty in the territories they hold? How does clientelism mark a continuity trend with former authoritarian regimes?
- Topic:
- Non State Actors, Governance, Armed Forces, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Libya, Yemen, and North Africa
338. How have sanctions impacted Russia?
- Author:
- Maria Demertzis, Benjamin Hilgenstock, Ben McWilliams, Elina Ribakova, and Simone Tagliapietra
- Publication Date:
- 10-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Bruegel
- Abstract:
- Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has triggered a series of sanctions imposed by the European Union, the United States and others. Sanctions included restrictions on Russia’s financial industry, its central bank and its coal and oil exporters, in addition to general export controls. Meanwhile, foreign companies have withdrawn voluntarily from the Russian market as a result of a ‘self-sanctioning’ trend. We assess the impact these sanctions have had on Russia’s economy in the immediate aftermath of the invasion and more structurally. Russian fiscal revenues have not suffered from sanctions sufficiently to reduce the length of this war. Effective management by the Bank of Russia has prevented financial instability and has therefore also protected the real economy. However, this picture of economic containment is coming to an end. Russia’s fiscal revenues are now beginning to take a hit; given the breadth of sanctions, the economy will suffer in the medium to long term. The voluntary departure of a large number of western firms, eventual energy decoupling by the EU and Russia’s inability to find equal alternatives will damage the Russian economy severely. As the Russian economy closes in on itself, it will become harder to find reliable data to evaluate the extent of the hit. Still greater sanctions coordination across the globe is needed to isolate the Russian economy, limit the flow of income into Russian coffers and therefore help stop the war.
- Topic:
- Governance, Sanctions, Economy, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
339. Will Ukraine’s refugees go home?
- Author:
- Uri Dadush and Pauline Weil
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Bruegel
- Abstract:
- About 15 percent of the population has fled Ukraine since the start of the Russian aggression in February 2022. Nearly 4 million Ukrainians have already registered in European Union countries. Based in part on evidence that few refugees return voluntarily to poor countries once they settle in rich countries, even once security is re-established at home, it can be expected that large numbers of Ukrainian refugees are likely to remain in European host countries, and will likely be joined by others, including many men that remained to fight when the conflict is over. Ukraine already has a long history of emigration. Its shattered economy, the likelihood of a protracted conflict and significant uncertainty with regard to its final status reinforce the argument that most refugees will not return and many more will join them. EU nations must prepare for. There will be large short-term costs and long-term economic gains from Ukrainian immigration in Europe. The best way to help Ukraine, and to moderate the likely outflow of its people, will be to assist in the country’s reconstruction, and not to place artificial impediments to the immigration of individuals who have already suffered greatly.
- Topic:
- Migration, Governance, Reconstruction, Refugees, Economy, Trade, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Europe, and Ukraine
340. Enlarging and deepening: giving substance to the European Political Community
- Author:
- Franz Mayer, Jean Pisani-Ferry, Daniela Schwarzer, and Shahin Vallée
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Bruegel
- Abstract:
- France’s President Emmanuel Macron and Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz have stressed the geopolitical emergency of re-designing the European Union’s relationship with its neighbourhood. Both acknowledge that EU enlargement is necessary, but also emphasise that profound EU institutional reform is required beforehand, though deepening and widening the EU are complex processes that veto players could block. The geopolitical challenges mean it is in the critical interest of the EU to bring stability to its neighbourhood by ensuring geopolitical alignment with the EU, limiting the blackmailing power of external, authoritarian states, supporting more resilient democracies and strengthening the rule of law. Meanwhile, the EU’s neighbours are seeking a political space in which challenges to collective security and stability can be addressed and concrete policies decided. Given the urgency, it is not enough to rely on lengthy EU accession processes. A ‘European Political Community’ (EPC), which will have its first summit on 6 October 2022, could act both as a bridge to an eventual larger EU and as a framework for continental-scale partnership. Leaders should use the summit to start the building of a platform that can combine political dialogue with policy delivery in a quick and flexible way, and will thus structure more impactfully the relationship between the EU and its neighbourhood. The EPC could start as a soft law agreement between states and the EU. It would work with existing institutions as far as possible, while aiming at more effective decision-making than currently in the EU. For instance it could function without vetoes and could work in geopolitically relevant areas that are not yet EU competences. An ambitious EPC would provide financial resources for deeper cooperation on energy and climate, security and defence, and economic and social convergence. The EPC would not be, and should not be, regarded as a substitute for EU accession, but should be designed in such a way that it can work as an accelerator. For countries not seeking to join the EU, it would provide an ongoing framework that sustains structured cooperation with the EU.
- Topic:
- Security, Politics, Governance, and European Union
- Political Geography:
- Europe