Search

Begin New Search Topic Society Political Geography Global Focus

1. Halving Global Violence Starts in Our Homes and Streets

Author:
Luisa Portugal
Publication Date:
09-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation (CIC)
Abstract:
In recent years, the world has seen a sharp increase in the number and intensity of armed conflicts globally. From 2020 to 2022, conflict deaths increased nearly fourfold, reaching numbers unseen since the end of the Cold War. The impacts of these wars do not stop at the battlefield; they undermine and destroy social contracts between people and states, slow and even reverse economic participation, and shatter communal bonds—leading to further injuries and deaths. Despite their impact, the multilateral ecosystem faces significant challenges and barriers in offering solutions or relief to these conflicts. Adding to the damage caused by armed conflicts is the widespread and devastating cost of criminal and interpersonal violence. It is crucial to shift the conversation on violence reduction and prevention into the development space. As member states decide during September 2024 at the Summit of Future what the Pact for the Future will look like, they should heed this call and focus on finding practical solutions for the violence that most often impacts people’s everyday lives. This new analysis, part of the CIC Perspectives series, examines the following: A development approach to reducing violence; What works to prevent and reduce violence; Four takeaways for the Summit of the Future.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Development, Violence, Armed Conflict, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Aligning ESG and SDGs at the Urban Level

Author:
Kris Hartley
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
This report outlines how cities and the private sector can collaborate on and magnify sustainability efforts that enable broad systemic change. Sustainability efforts require not only public policy interventions and resources but also the initiative and innovation of the private sector. These are systematized through the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for governments, including at the city level, and through environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles for companies. Bringing these two approaches into alignment is a crucial step for fostering multi-sectoral sustainability effort, but this alignment is largely unrealized. Among the local-government sustainability documents examined for this report, mentions of corporate activity are minimal and often superficial, primarily addressing the participation of companies in multi-stakeholder discussions about policy issues. In turn, ESG reports center on the decisions and actions of corporations, with public governance referenced largely in the context of regulatory limitations and policy objectives that affect business operations. Local governments and companies are undertaking sustainability efforts in their own ways. Merging the two through shared focus and strategy can magnify sustainability efforts in ways that enable the broad systemic change needed to avert climate crisis and societal disruption. This report outlines how a more collaborative approach can proceed, first by providing an overview of policy and corporate sustainability efforts and second by detailing examples of both. The report concludes with a discussion about how sustainability narratives can be harmonized between the two sectors.
Topic:
Environment, United Nations, Governance, Sustainable Development Goals, Private Sector, Cities, Society, and Public-Private Partnership
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Las políticas de seguridad y defensa como valor público y bien común

Author:
Xavier Torrens
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on International Security Studies (RESI)
Institution:
International Security Studies Group (GESI) at the University of Granada
Abstract:
Una nueva perspectiva de la seguridad y la defensa centradaen el enfoque de bienes comunes abre la puerta a una relaciónentre Estado y sociedadcon gobernanza. De hecho, se trata deuna nueva forma de legitimación políticadel uso de la fuerza para garantizar la seguridadrealzándola como bien común(Ostrom, 1900) y como valor público (Moore, 1998). En el escenario actual de riesgos, cada vez la política de seguridad se desarrolla más allá de lo que algunos han llamado en decir lo estrictamente securitario. En este sentido, la teoría de los bienes comunes es un marco conceptual clave para comprender la transformación y el cambio de paradigma en las políticas de seguridad. Las cuestiones que se plantean en este monográfico giran en torno al marco teórico-conceptual de los bienes comunes, o bien a algunos de sus elementos. Desde la perspectiva de los bienes comunes, la seguridady la defensa, y sus políticaspúblicas, tienen en cuenta el valor que se crea a partir de las dinámicas entre distintos actores.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Governance, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. The Core Constituents in the Process of National Integration: A Thematic Study

Author:
Gohar Ali Iftikhar
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
The process of history has unveiled that the composition of human society is an outcome of diverse historical processes and experiences. It leads to the formation of identities ranging from personal, collective, social and cultural identities. In this retrospect, the progress of national integration has been materialised. The phenomena of national integration are common; however, its understanding, interpretation and manifestation levels differ. Every society, community and nation has defined and defied it in its pertinent context. The present study is a thematic work on the process of national integration focusing on the core constituents which had played a decisive role. It seeks to explore how core constituents became the driving force of national integration and how different countries applied it. Furthermore, the study attempts to describe and analyse thematic patterns in the context of National Integration.
Topic:
History, Integration, Society, National Integration, and Constituents
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. Majority Minority: How do societies respond to great demographic change?

Author:
Justin Gest
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
MIT Center for International Studies
Abstract:
Justin Gest is an Associate Professor of Policy and Government at George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government. He is the author of six books and a variety of peer-reviewed articles on immigration and the politics of demographic change. He co-edits the Oxford University Press book series, “Oxford Studies in Migration and Citizenship” and has provided reporting or commentary for ABC, BBC, CBC, CNN, The Guardian, Los Angeles Times, NPR, The New York Times, Politico, Reuters, Vox, and The Washington Post. In 2014 and 2020, Professor Gest received Harvard University’s Joseph R. Levenson Memorial Teaching Prize and George Mason University’s Teaching Excellence Award, respectively each university’s highest award for faculty teaching. In 2013, he received the Star Family Prize for Student Advising, Harvard’s highest award for student advising. In 2007, he co-founded the Migration Studies Unit at the London School of Economics (LSE).
Topic:
Demographics, Immigration, Minorities, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. Reducing Pernicious Polarization: A Comparative Historical Analysis of Depolarization

Author:
Jennifer McCoy, Benjamin Press, Murat Somer, and Ozlem Tuncel
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The global rise of political polarization has fueled concerns about its detrimental impact on politics and society. From an increase in political violence to a decrease in the quality of democracy and governance, the threats posed by pernicious polarization—the division of society into two mutually antagonistic political camps—are diverse and acute. Determining how to reduce these tensions is therefore an urgent challenge. Using data on political polarization from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) data set, this working paper assesses various instances of depolarization around the globe since 1900 and analyzes their long-term sustainability. Polarization is increasing worldwide. When broken down by region, V-Dem data suggest that every region except Oceania has seen polarization levels rise since 2005. Africa has had the smallest increase during this period, although it has long had high levels of polarization. Rising polarization in Europe is being driven by deepening political divisions in Eastern and Central Europe, Southern Europe, and the Balkans. In the Western Hemisphere, the largest democracies—Brazil, Mexico, and the United States—are all experiencing extreme levels of polarization. East Asia’s polarization levels have traditionally been low, though increasing political tensions in places like South Korea and Taiwan are driving up the region’s score. And in South Asia, India’s polarization has skyrocketed since 2014. Jennifer McCoy Jennifer McCoy is a nonresident scholar in the Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, where she focuses on political polarization and democratic resilience in the U.S. and around the world. To better understand the various paths by which polarized societies might overcome or reduce their political divisions, this working paper examines perniciously polarized countries that have successfully depolarized, at least for a time. Through a quantitative analysis of the V-Dem data set, this study identifies 105 episodes from 1900 to 2020 where countries were able to reduce polarization from pernicious levels for at least five years. These 105 episodes represent roughly half of the total episodes of pernicious polarization during the time period, thus indicating a fairly robust capacity of countries to depolarize. If considered in terms of country experiences rather than episodes (because many countries have experienced multiple episodes in a cycle of polarization and depolarization), then the data indicate that two-thirds of the 178 countries for which V-Dem provides polarization data have experienced one or more episodes of pernicious polarization, but only thirty-five countries (20 percent) have failed to experience any depolarization to below-pernicious levels. Given this apparent capacity among the majority of the world’s countries to depolarize from pernicious levels at least some of the time, this analysis seeks to identify the contexts and sustainability of those experiences and to encourage further research into their causal mechanisms and outcomes for democracies. The analysis offers a preliminary discussion of the potential meaning and normative implications of depolarization as a concept and policy goal. It then uses qualitative analysis to identify patterns in the contexts of various depolarization cases and gauge the sustainability of these trends. Most of these depolarization episodes were associated with dramatic changes in a country’s political life. An analysis of contextual factors showed that almost three-quarters of the cases came after major systemic shocks: a foreign intervention, independence struggle, violent conflict, or regime change (primarily in a democratizing direction). In the remainder of cases, countries depolarized within a given regime structure, whether democratic or autocratic. Tellingly, the authors identified no cases of depolarization from pernicious levels among liberal democracies. This is because very few countries classified as full liberal democracies have ever reached pernicious levels; the United States stands out today as the only wealthy Western democracy with persistent levels of pernicious polarization. Just under half of all depolarizing cases were able to sustain depolarization for a decade or longer. In a second sizeable group of cases, countries managed polarization to some degree, either living with chronic near-pernicious levels after depolarizing, or else repolarizing to near-pernicious levels within ten years. Finally, 15 percent of the cases returned to pernicious levels within the first decade. Troublingly, when the authors analyzed the entire time period from 1900 to 2020, nearly half of the countries that had sustained depolarization or managed polarization for at least a decade later returned to pernicious levels of polarization. These outcomes illustrate the difficulty of sustaining low levels of polarization, and they indicate that a cyclical pattern of polarization, depolarization, and repolarization may be a characteristic feature of political life in many places. Only a fraction (14 percent) of cases resulted in sustained depolarization over the long term.The mechanisms and strategies that enable such sustained depolarization in democracies will be the subject of future research. But given the small number of democracies (eleven) able to accomplish this feat amid the larger pattern of cyclical polarization and depolarization, it will be crucial to also understand strategies of managing polarization at moderately high levels while avoiding democratic erosion, government dysfunction, or returns to pernicious polarization and potential violence.
Topic:
Politics, History, Polarization, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

7. Goal-Based Global Governance Challenges: The Real Significance of the SDGs

Author:
Norichika Kanie
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
Abstract:
In modern society, every issue is connected to another. As suggested in the proverb "When the wind blows, the bucket maker gains", various self-differentiated issues actually interrelate and influence each other in today's world, where globalization has made considerable progress and the Internet infrastructure has become widespred and continues to evolve. These issues can be broadly divided into three types: economic, social and environmental. At first glance, economic, social and environmental issues appear to be independent issues, but in fact they are deeply and strongly related. If you buy and drink bottled water from a vending machine to cope with "life-threatening" heat, for instance, you can rehydrate yourself as an immediate necessary measure against climate change. But, if the water bottle is a petroleum product, incinerating it as garbage also promotes climate change. If we turn on air conditioning, we may be able to escape the mortal danger posed by climate change. However, as long as the electricity is produced by coal-fired power plants, using it will also contribute to climate change.
Topic:
Environment, Governance, Economy, Sustainable Development Goals, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

8. Recognizing Communities: Local Level Responses to the Pathfinders Grand Challenges

Author:
Tara Moayed
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation (CIC)
Abstract:
Communities are not homogenous. Within a single community, there are often divisions along class, ethnic, and gender lines. Further, not all communities are the same. Dynamics from one community to the next can widely differ, including power relations, land allocations, gender dynamics, mobility, and the level of government influence. James Scott, in Seeing Like A State, showed how much of the vocabulary of state administration carries with it the mechanisms to disempower local authority and invest it in state agents who can then wield state authority. Rebalancing this relationship requires finding ways to overcome the monopolies over information, decision-making, and convening power that state agents have, particularly in systems that emerged from an extractive colonial context. Ignoring these dynamics when designing a CDD project will most likely result in elite capture, and possibly lead to local conflict, increased inequality, and erode trust between citizens and the state. This research paper argues the importance of the role of the community within the Pathfinders for Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies discussion over inequality. The paper’s case studies are based largely on government-led community-driven development (CDD) programs that aim to ensure recognition of the complicated dynamics within the community itself. Unless the heterogeneity of communities is considered and fostered through an inclusive design and facilitation process, no program or project can hope to impact inclusion, empowerment, and the citizen-state relationship. A deep understanding of community dynamics and good facilitation are prerequisites for any CDD model to have a positive social impact.
Topic:
Citizenship, State, Community, Society, and Inclusion
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Inequality, Lockdown, and COVID-19: Unequal Societies Struggle to Contain the Virus

Author:
Paul von Chamier
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on International Cooperation (CIC)
Abstract:
There is nothing equal about COVID-19. It is now well established that poor and underprivileged social groups have absorbed most of the pandemic’s negative impact. However, the connection between COVID-19 and inequality might run even deeper. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, one additional point of the Gini coefficient correlated with a 1.34 percentage point higher rate of weekly new infections across countries. This difference in infection rates compounds like interest every week. This means that after twenty-one weeks of the pandemic, just one additional Gini å correlates with an approximately 1/3 higher overall number of cases in a country. More equal countries might enjoy an “equality dividend” that is associated with more shock resilience during the ongoing crisis. This new research from CIC sought to understand if pre-existing systemic inequities could be linked to higher COVID-19 infection rates, examining infection rates in 70 countries from mid-March 2020 through early August 2020, or what is widely seen as the first 21 weeks of the pandemic. It also studied these nations’ levels of inequality and other potential predictive variables: government efficiency (a measure indicating quality of public services and civil service capability), urban population share, share of the population over the age of 65, lockdown measures (calculated by stringency), and geographic mobility (a population’s physical movements as measured by Google’s COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports). The study tracked inequality by using the “Gini Coefficient,” a commonly used metric for measuring income inequality within nations--or, specifically, how far a country’s wealth or income distribution deviates from a completely equal distribution. Under this calculation, the higher the coefficient, the greater the income inequality within that country.
Topic:
Inequality, Resilience, COVID-19, Health Crisis, and Society
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. The Sydney Dialogue: Playbook

Author:
Fergus Hanson, Danielle Cave, and Madeleine Nyst
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
Major advances in technology have always been disruptive. But when they occur against a backdrop of great power competition, the stable development and deployment of these technologies becomes fraught. Few have grasped the enormity of the disruption coming our way as more and more new technologies – from increasingly sophisticated surveillance to quantum and biotechnologies – are deployed across the world. While governments grapple with foreseeing the full impacts and setting policy direction, there’s a growing realisation that emerging and critical technologies will be extraordinarily important for societies, economies and national security. We launched The Sydney Dialogue to support a more stable roll-out of the next wave of transformational technologies. It is a forum allowing for frank debate about the rapidly changing strategic landscape, and a space for governments, business and civil society to come together to focus on solutions, cooperation and policy options. The Sydney Dialogue came about because we saw big gaps in forums on technology, especially in the Indo-Pacific. There were industry events that showcased the latest technical advances and products, but they tended to eschew policy debates, and did not encompass government and civil society. There were important government multilateral discussion and policymaking forums, but these usually lagged well behind technological advances, and because they were primarily for governments, key global players – including those making the technology – weren’t part of the discussion. And there were excellent civil society initiatives, but these often focused on individual topics that were only one piece of a larger puzzle. Few of these initiatives focused on or resonated in the Indo-Pacific – the region that incubates much of the world’s technological innovation and has become a hotbed of strategic technological competition. These gaps drove us towards a dynamic where all the key actors were speaking past one another, while rarely all being in the same room. Tech companies are developing and deploying products that are revolutionary and hugely disruptive. A decade later, governments are scrambling to retrospectively legislate to address issues they did not foresee, and civil society is critiquing from the sidelines. Right now, three major problems must be addressed to ensure the stable development of advanced technologies. First, there’s the large lag between the deployment of new technologies and regulation governing them. With social media, this lag was about a decade. As we’ve seen, this doesn’t lead to good outcomes for individuals, or for societies. Second, there’s a delay between states’ use of new technologies and their consideration of the ethical questions raised by its use. Examples of this can be seen in the global surveillance industry, which has allowed its products to support some of the most egregious human rights abuses of our times. Third, a tense relationship between governments and technology companies is playing out around the world. The negative dynamic that has taken hold is hindering progress and genuine cooperation, leaving democracies at risk of being left behind. The Sydney Dialogue seeks to fill a gap and contribute towards these big challenges. By bringing world leaders, tech company CEOs and the world’s top civil society voices together for an annual dialogue, we hope the roll-out of the next wave of revolutionary technologies over the coming decade can be better managed. This collection of striking essays from some of the world’s top strategic thinkers from across business, government and civil society is a fitting way to start this dialogue. It explores timely debates at the forefront of technology and examines points of crisis and tension in the nexus of society, government and technology. Crucially, it offers innovative ideas to solve these challenges and bring about a brighter, fairer Indo-Pacific. The following pieces bring us all a much-needed dose of optimism and show that in many cases, the solutions already exist – we just need to work together to bring them to life.
Topic:
National Security, Science and Technology, Economy, Surveillance, and Society
Political Geography:
Australia and Global Focus