Polen og krigen i Ukraina: Er stemningen i ferd med å snu?
The main aim of this article is to map how the Russian invasion of Ukraine has influenced Polish attitudes and, consequently, Polish politics. The article begins with a thorough review of Polish attitudes toward Ukraine, Ukrainians, and the war. It also analyzes whether Polish attitudes differ from those in other NATO and EU countries. This analysis of attitudes is followed by an eclectic examination of the measures implemented by Polish authorities in response to the war, based on various understandings of the forces shaping international relations, with particular emphasis on explanations rooted in realist, liberal-institutionalist, and constructivist perspectives of international relations.
Franske tilstander
Politisk drama har preget Frankrike i mange måneder, og fransk politikk er mer usikker enn vi har sett på mange tiår. Det kan kaste Europa ut i en...
Trailblazers in a Warming World? The Agency of African Actors in Climate, Peace, and Security
A growing body of evidence indicates how climate change can, combined with other factors, increase the risk of violent conflict. Such claims have particularly been made in African contexts. This article studies the agency exerted by African actors in shaping international agendas on climate, peace, and security in the cases of (1) the UN Security Council, (2) The African Union and (3) COP27. The analysis shows how this engagement has included diplomacy, discursive innovation, epistemic engagement, and policy coordination. We argue that the continent’s growing geopolitical centrality is enabling African actors to exert a nonaligned foreign policy on their own terms.
Review of Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions for Human Rights
A strong contribution to international studies’ scientific ontology of human rights processes, Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions in Human Rights illuminates and dissects a hitherto underappreciated but influential process through which non-state actors influence the interpretation and thus implementation of human rights law. Indeed, getting down among the weeds of human rights treaty bodies’ lawmaking processes, Reiners emerges with a compelling account of how an informal, important if transient, actor, she calls Transnational Lawmaking Coalitions (TLCs), clarifies human rights law and thereby structure states’ human rights obligations through drafting general comments. Operating across the boundaries of inter-governmental organizations, Reiners documents how TLCs emerge out of the “opportunity structure” generated by the recurring need to clarify human rights law and the chronic underfunding of human rights treaty expert bodies (p. 55). Composing of at least one of the treaty body’s appointed expert members, we have a case of TLC when members of the expert body then reach outside to utilize expertise within their professional networks for drafting a general comment. According to Reiners, working outside formal processes, these expert networks conduct their work on a shoestring budget lubricated primarily with the social capital, professional recognition, and moral conviction (p. 57). While lacking formalized processes for engaging with stakeholders, TLCs nonetheless render what can become authoritative new human rights interpretations, largely beyond the purvey or at least the direct influence of the state parties (pp. 22–4). As Reiners put it, TLCs “emerge from” and “operate through” the formal bodies but are not formal institutional entities themselves nor directly employed by state parties (p. 46). In this way, TLCs can be understood as exploiting a loophole in the human rights architecture through which non-state actors can bypass deadlocked formal treaty-making processes (p. 142–3).
In the Blind Spot of the Norwegian EU Debate: EU Health Preparedness After COVID-19
This article challenges the Norwegian EU debate by focusing on an overlooked but increasingly important policy area for European cooperation, namely health policy and more specifically health preparedness. The EU has started major processes related to health preparedness in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. Norway takes part in some of these processes through the EEA agreement but is also currently excluded from important areas. This article serves two purposes: it maps ongoing EU development in health preparedness and assesses the extent to which this area should occupy more space in the Norwegian EU debate, including the sustainability of the current status quo. The article further identifies two specific areas that are central to Norway in relation to health preparedness. The first concerns the development of the EU’s Health Union and Norway’s political work to ensure formal access to all the initiatives that have recently been developed in the EU. The other concerns the effects that the EU’s intensified work on health preparedness has for the Norwegian health industry. The article concludes that Norwegian vulnerabilities are particularly linked to Norway’s political role as an EU outsider, but that these vulnerabilities must be considered in the context of any contribution the Norwegian health industry can make in the European health market if Norway becomes more closely connected to the Health Union.
How do donors integrate climate policy and development cooperation? An analysis of the development aid policies of 42 donor countries
This article assesses how donor countries integrate climate action into their development aid policies. An analytical framework is developed for the systematic comparison of development aid policies along three dimensions: hierarchy of policy objectives, types of measures the donors implement, and linkages to international climate negotiations. Analyzing the development aid policies of 42 donors, we find that only three have redesigned their development aid policies to fully integrate climate policy concerns. Instead, donors treat climate change as a thematic priority area. This includes several donors that are currently not obliged to provide climate finance under the UNFCCC. Furthermore, five major donor countries emphasize the use of diverse foreign policy tools to support climate action in developing countries. Importantly, we identify how other development goals (poverty, gender) are integrated with climate policy goals. Only two donor countries clearly separate development aid and climate finance. Luxembourg states that its climate finance pledge is additional to development, while New Zealand has a separate climate finance strategy where the allocation of funds is based on climate mitigation effectiveness concerns.
Ecosystems and Ordering: A Dataset
This article presents a dataset, examining how global ecosystems are governed, offering data about cooperation initiatives around 221 cross-bordered ecosystems. This sample of cases was selected from a list of 1525 “meta-ecosystems” catalogued by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and a team of scientists (terrestrial ecosystems, [6]; freshwater ecosystems, [2]; and marine ecosystems, [9]). The 221 ecosystems were selected because they are shared by four or more bordering countries. Departing from this unit of analysis, we researched the cooperative cross-border governance anchored in each ecosystem and categorized each of these based on the level and type of cooperation. In generating this dataset, our coding scheme was designed to also capture cases of non-cooperation: when our search protocol did not result in the identification of any initiative for an ecosystem, the ecosystem was coded as a “zero case.” When we found initiatives connected to the ecosystems, our coding typology specifically classified cooperation initiatives along two dimensions: cooperation geographical scope and cooperation scope (single or multi-issue). The dataset presents ecosystem-anchored cooperation initiatives, as well as wider initiatives that may address ecosystem issues, to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and in which form ecosystems are addressed in transboundary governance efforts. The dataset allows for further study of ecosystemic governance patterns, enabling analysis of the causes and consequences of cooperation, since it can be easily integrated with both the ecosystem and state-level data. The dataset is presented in two .csv files and has been handled with R software in order to present the visualization.
Techno-optimism versus Techno-reality: An analysis of internationally funded technological solutions against illegal unreported and unregulated (IU...
Maritime governance has been immersed in growing techno-optimism. Technological developments have largely increased the capacity of states to render legible activities at sea and thus more effectively govern them. One area in which such techno-optimism has gained force but is yet to prove itself is the fight against Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) fishing. While technology-aided international cooperation has been crucial in curbing piracy, it has been slower to tame IUU fishing. In this article, we study international projects introducing technology-based solutions against IUU fishing in West Africa. Triangulating project documentation, donor evaluations, interviews, and other secondary sources, we assess how the techno-optimism driving those initiatives meets the techno-reality of their contexts of implementation. We find that, while grounds for optimism are far from unwarranted, realizing the potential of technological solutions against IUU fishing requires securing parallel cooperation that allows states to transform technology-based awareness into action.
Improving UN peacekeeping performance through evidence-based impact assessments
Improving the impact of the UN Peacebuilding Commission and enhancing the synergy of the Peacebuilding Architecture - Input Paper for the 2025 (...
The United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture – consisting of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) and the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) - was established in 2005. In 2025, 20 years after the PBA was established, the Architecture will undergo a review. This Input Paper, by researchers from the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), serves as an input to this review. It is informed by NUPI’s research on peacebuilding and related areas, including the research undertaken in support of the previous 5-, 10- and 15-year reviews of the Peacebuilding Architecture. The main challenge that has consistently been identified over the years, including in previous reviews of the Peacebuilding Architecture, is the perceived lack of impact and relevance of the Peacebuilding Commission. In our assessment, the Peacebuilding Commission’s attention to countries and regions are too ad hoc and fleeting to generate meaningful information and analysis. This is one of the main areas that we single out for improvement. This input paper therefore focuses on providing a set of practical recommendations for how the impact of the Peacebuilding Commission can be improved, and how the synergies of the Peacebuilding Architecture can be enhanced.