Myanmar: A Political Economy Analysis

Myanmar may for a long time remain in a transitional state with an uncertain future. After a series of political and economic liberalization reforms from 2011 onwards, Myanmar’s political trajectory remains open-ended, although the most plausible scenario remains a continued slow democratization process. The democratic opening has been driven largely by the interest of the military rulers in changing Myanmar’s relations with Western states and thereby gaining leverage vis-à-vis China. Continued military influence, persistent capacity problems in political parties and parliamentary politics, weak channels of political representation and limited administrative capacity give rise to critical questions about the substance of democratization and economic development in Myanmar. The country’s informal economy is one of the largest in the world and is upheld by informal elite pacts that were formed in the military era, often involving high-ranking officers and crony companies. Along with a high level of corruption and lack of redistributive mechanisms the continuing cronyism hinders inclusive growth. If these economic structures persist, social and ethnic conflicts may intensify and progress towards further democratization stall. Despite this, foreign direct investments in resource extraction and other sectors have been on the rise since 2011 and are likely to continue. Myanmar is also ranked as the world’s second-most vulnerable country to climate change. The government needs a better understanding of climate change and its effects – both its direct impacts on Myanmar and its indirect impacts via neighbouring countries such as Bangladesh. As Myanmar remains at a crossroads, smart external assistance may have greater long-term impact in Myanmar than in other recipient countries where the situation is less volatile. However, donors may also become increasingly frustrated and reduce their assistance because of the ongoing Rohingya crisis and because of the limited local capacity to absorb international assistance.

Norwegian exports in global value chains

This study analyses the participation of the Norwegian economy in global value chains in 2000-2014, following the gross exports decomposition framework in Koopman, Wang and Wei (2014) and using the World Input-Output Database (WIOD). The analysis shows that Norway increased its participation in global value chains through both backward and forward linkages, but the latter is more dominant and re ects Norway's endowments in natural resources. Moreover, the study reveals that services exports increased substantially during the period analysed and are even higher than manufacturing exports if measured in value-added terms rather than gross terms. This highlights the key role of services in global value chains as well as the relevance of measuring trade in value-added terms.

Religiøs autoritet og tynnslitt stat: Valgkamp i sjia-Irak

Comparative Analysis for Theory Development: Reflections on a Study of Women’s Empowerment

Methodological texts about comparative work have focused overwhelmingly on controlled comparisons aimed at causal inference. To show the range of possible goals and approaches, this piece reflects on our own choices while studying the state and women’s empowerment in Norway, Japan, and the United States. We show how our research design evolved with our theoretical thinking, and explain that we did not select comparative “cases,” but rather diverse contexts with interesting variation in our main concept of interest. Finally, we discuss how we constructed multi-cultural research teams to take advantage of insider and outsider perspectives during fieldwork.

EU climate and energy policy: new challenges for old energy suppliers

Climate policy will transform the EU energy demand mix. This has implications for the main suppliers of fossil fuels to the EU, foremost among which are Algeria, Colombia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Norway, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the USA. Norway has a better starting point for adapting to changing EU energy demand than the other energy suppliers and therefore represents a best-case scenario. Whatever Norway fails to do, the other countries are even less likely to achieve. The question is whether Norway has been quick enough to exploit the opportunities to play a proactive role in the EU’s energy transition. This chapter argues that it has not, dragging its feet on natural gas vehicles, Norwegian wind power, electricity interconnectors, green battery development and mixing of hydrogen into natural gas. Some possible reasons for the tardiness are Norway’s dual resource course of oil and hydropower, carbon lock-in, energy populism, resource nationalism and blind spots in the perception of Norway’s place in international climate and energy policy.