Funding flows for climate change research on Africa: Where do they come from and where do they go?
Africa has only contributed a small fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions yet faces disproportionate risks from climate change. This imbalance is one of many inequities associated with climate change and raises questions concerning the origin, distribution and thematic prioritization of funding for climate-change research on Africa. This article analyses a database comprising USD 1.51 trillion of research grants from 521 organizations around the world and covering all fields of research from 1990 to 2020. At most 3.8% of global funding for climate-change research is spent on African topics – a figure incommensurate with Africa’s share of the world population and vulnerability to climate change. Moreover, institutions based in Europe and North America received 78% of funding for climate research on Africa, while African institutions received only 14.5%. Research on climate mitigation received only 17% of the funding while climate impacts and adaptation each received around 40%. Except for Egypt and Nigeria, funding supported research on former British colonies more than other African countries. The findings highlight the need to prioritise research on a broader set of climate-change issues in Africa and to increase funding for Africa-based researchers in order to strengthen African ownership of research informing African responses to climate change.
Barnevernet, utenrikspolitikken og diplomatiet: Hvordan møter stater internasjonal kritikk?
Presentation to the Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs, international department.
Line Marie Breistrand
Line Marie Breistrand was a doctoral student at NUPI, working with China in international politics. In her doctoral project, she analyzes China's...
Ecosystemic politics: Analyzing the consequences of speaking for adjacent nature on the global stage
This article introduces a conceptual framework for analysing and comparing the broader or unintended effects of cooperation anchored in border-crossing ecosystems. The importance of addressing this lacuna in our scholarship on such sub-global cooperation is underscored by research in political geography that has demonstrated how the creation of scale is an important expression of power relations and how interaction with the materiality of different kinds of spaces necessitates distinct political technologies (and thus may have distinct effects). The article introduces three key analytical angles central to policy field studies in international sociology and demonstrates their utility through a case of the Arctic/Arctic Council. These analytical angles – networks (what are the relationships shaping the field?), hierarchies (who leads and how does leadership work?), and norms for political behavior – capture key consequences and dynamics of ecosystemic politics in a concise fashion that lends itself to cross-case comparison. The Arctic case focuses on the changing network positions and roles of non-Arctic actors over time, as an initial exploration of the broader ordering effects of such forms of cooperation. The findings suggest that most non-Arctic actors have experienced a decline in their centrality in Arctic cooperation, even as the Arctic has received intensified global interest and the number of participants in Arctic Council work has increased. Further comparative work along these lines would leave us better equipped to assess whether states speaking for their own immediate environs is better – and if so, in which ways – than seeking common solutions to global challenges.
Op-ed: Why Peace Should Matter for the COP, and Why COP26 is Important for Peace
Hvis ikke Norge går i bresjen for en grønn omstilling, hvem da?
The faster Norway embarks on a responsible but speedy end to its reliance on oil, the greater the potential reputational, diplomatic, and commercial gains for Norway, write three NUPI researchers in this op-ed.
Mistenkelig kritikk
Why is media so uncritical towards Norwegian foreign policy?
The Politics of Competence in Global Health: The European Commission’s Global Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
What was the European Commission’s (EC) global response to the COVID-19 pandemic and how did it use the crisis to claim competence in the area of global health? This article explores the EC’s global coronavirus response. In so doing, it suggests studying the crisis response in terms of how the EC struggled to be recognized as a competent player in the international community of states and institutions. In particular, the article shows how the EC utilized the crisis unleashed by the pandemic to engage in geopolitical positioning in relation to World Health Organization (WHO) funding and the vaccine race, and by using its financial clout to struggle for mastery as a global health actor. The article responds to the challenge of understanding differentiation in the broader field of European foreign, security and defence policies. By treating informal practices by the EC on the world stage in and of themselves, the article shows how the constant struggle for competence plays into the politics of European integration and considers its potential for being instantiated in formal transfers of competence in the area of global health.
Gruppepress – fungerer det?
Can Norway contribute to an effective peer pressure through commitment to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)? Espen Mathy argues that peer pressure might push other countries to commit, however only in the cases where commitment does not imply a reduction in national security.