As part of a larger study on the future of the post-World War II liberal international order, RAND researchers analyze the health of the existing order and offer implications for future U.S. policy. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
This document maps institutionalized initiatives—by governments, regional bodies, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)—that have been created in response to the global phenomenon of increasing restrictions on civil society space. In varying ways, these initiatives pursue the goal of reclaiming civic space and countering governments’ attempts to close space: spanning from advocacy from afar to financial support as well as legal and technical assistance provided to and by civil society on the ground. This collection has been generated on the basis of references to initiatives in several key works and has been complemented by references in other publications and targeted online searches as well as through feedback from regional experts in the context of the International Consortium on Closing Civic Space (iCon).1 While it contains governmental and nongovernmental—often multi-stakeholder—initiatives with regional, sometimes even global, reach, it neither contains initiatives that are specific to a particular government and particular countries nor initiatives that solely focus on monitoring restrictions of civil society. The majority of the initiatives listed here have been created in the past couple of years in response to closing space; most of the initiatives are active today, although some are (temporarily) inactive or have ceased. The following overview is mainly based on the information offered online by the initiatives themselves. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
This Perspective explores the potential impacts that digital technologies may have on the nature of civic engagement and political processes, providing an overview of the ways in which digital platforms and tools may contribute to strengthening a more inclusive civil society, and highlighting the significant risks posed by the use of these technologies. The authors argue that these risks must be properly understood and addressed if democratic society is to benefit from continuing innovation in this space. This Perspective is part of a series of four exploring the opportunities and challenges that digital technologies are creating within society ahead of the 2017 Thought Leadership programme at St George’s House, Windsor which has been designed and delivered by RAND Europe in conjunction with the Corsham Institute. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
Heather A. Conley, Senior Vice President for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic; and Director, Europe Program, testified before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (U.S. Helsinki Commission) on, “The Romanian Anti-Corruption Process: Successes and Excesses.” [Note: contains copyrighted material].
Politicians are reaping gains by wrapping themselves in flags and directing hostility toward globalization. “Humankind is developing an emerging ‘global consciousness’ – a collective sensitivity to noble thoughts as well as to phobias and ignoble protectionism,” explains Farok Contractor, a professor of global management at Rutgers University. Contractor describes how responses to global connections divide societies. One example is the embrace of Valentine’s Day by many consumers in Asia while some religious fanatics in India target foreign practices for eroding cultural traditions. Likewise, voters in rural United States and Britain, areas with few foreigners, fell prey to scaremongering about immigration while the more educated and wealthy in cities may be less threatened by multicultural ideas. Angst over job losses, stagnant wages and changing industries is real, but unscrupulous media and populists manipulate audiences by blaming globalization, trade and immigration rather than automation or the quest for modernization by majorities in many countries. Contractor concludes that “Globalization is a symptom of human desire and ambition leading to ever-increasing connections.” Nations that resist globalization, rather than engaging in thoughtful examination and policymaking, will encounter many negative consequences. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
Results Not Receipts explores how an important and justified focus on corruption is damaging the potential for aid to deliver results. Donors treat corruption as an issue they can measure and improve, and from which they can insulate their projects at acceptable costs by controlling processes and monitoring receipts. But our ability to measure corruption is limited, and the link between donors’ preferred measures and development outcomes is weak. Noting the costs of the standard anticorruption tools of fiduciary controls and centralized delivery, Results Not Receipts urges a different approach to tackling corruption in development: focus on outcomes. [Note: contains copyrighted material].
This study explores the extent to which processes are in place to enable the delivery of value for money through EU program funding in the field of democracy and rule of law. It includes a review of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the Instrument for Stability and Peace. It considers current ways of working and the potential for improvement. Analysis is based on interviews with EU program officials and EU delegations, and related documentary evidence. [Note: contains copyrighted material].