Digitalization in Central and Eastern Europe: Building regional cooperation

Digitalization in Central and Eastern Europe: Building regional cooperation. Atlantic Council. October 28, 2020.

Digitalization has been heralded as “the next engine of growth” for the economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the idea that digitalization can transform the region’s economic model has never been more relevant than amid the current coronavirus pandemic. In the 2018 seminal “Digital Challengers” study, McKinsey & Company estimated that a concerted effort at digitalization could add up to €200 billion to the region’s GDP. Now, accelerated digital adaptation provides an opportunity for Central and Eastern Europe to emerge from the COVID-19 crisis stronger and more resilient. If the region is to leverage digitalization to fuel economic recovery and overcome some of its own limitations—from market size and fragmentation to access to capital and the investor appeal of local technology clusters—there seem to be few alternatives to working together at a regional level.

But for a variety of reasons, it has proven challenging to build greater cooperation and policy coordination among CEE countries in this area. Even though there is a general consensus on the digital potential of the CEE countries, there is little clarity about how Central and Eastern Europe as a region can best move forward with digitalization to secure its full benefits and become leaders in shaping its future trajectory.

Convinced of the role digitalization can play in Central and Eastern Europe’s economic future and encouraged by new momentum in the debate, the Atlantic Council convened a task force of US and CEE digital innovators, experts, and thought leaders. This task force report seeks to move beyond the generalities about digitalization in Central and Eastern Europe. It lays out recommendations to strengthen regional cooperation on digital priorities, leverage existing regional forums such as the Three Seas Initiative, and amplify the region’s voice on the digital agenda—both in the EU and across the Atlantic. [Note: contains copyrighted material].

[PDF format, 40 pages].

After Disruption: Historical Perspectives on the Future of International Order

After Disruption: Historical Perspectives on the Future of International Order. Center for Strategic & International Studies. September 2, 2020

The Covid-19 pandemic has intensified the debate about whether world order is undergoing a fundamental change. Cornerstones of the post-1945 system—economic globalization, democratic governance, and U.S. leadership—face headwinds. At home, some Americans question whether international institutions and the order they underpin still serve the national interest.

In this critical moment, the Project on History and Strategy asked seven leading international historians to offer their insights about the relationship between disorder and order. How is order remade after pandemics, wars, and revolutions? How do different visions of order get resolved? Who contributes to the making of new orders? Can a faltering order be rehabilitated? Does “might” always make order, or can smaller actors shape the game? Does order emerge from ad hoc responses to specific problems, or can a master blueprint become reality? Collectively the historians produced insightful essays spanning four centuries of upheaval. They recapture the interplay of personality, power, and the forgotten contingency at the core of order-building efforts. [Note: contains copyrighted material].

[PDF format, 70 pages].

Governance Falls Behind Globalization

Governance Falls Behind Globalization. YaleGlobal. Ernesto Zedillo. December 3, 2012.

Many in the world point to the need for mechanisms to monitor and control globalization, particularly after a decade when debt crises in one country spread quickly around the globe. Yet as economic interdependence continues to build, governance is not keeping pace. Ernesto Zedillo reflects on globalization and its governance over the past decade. Developed countries have balked at sharing power with emerging economies. Likewise, nations do not want to disperse their power, and leaders resist pressures from domestic special interests. Attempts to reform international organizations, ensuring fair representation and sound procedures to address pending crises, have failed miserably. If anything, the gap between globalization and governance has only widened. The warning signs are there for numerous global crises that can only be resolved with cooperation. Zedillo urges political leaders to prepare their societies for the governance required to tackle the global crises. [Note: contains copyrighted material].

[HTML format, various paging].