One of the main arguments for implementing public works programmes (PWPs) instead of other social protection schemes such as cash transfers is that the assets created through these programmes themselves can generate medium- to long-term benefits. This is particularly important as the costs for supervision and the construction materials can account for up to 70 per cent of programme budgets. Despite this, there is scarce empirical evidence on PWPs’ effects through the “asset channel”: indeed; most studies have focused solely on the traditional “wage channel”. To bridge this gap, this paper examines whether and how assets created under Malawi’s Climate-Smart Enhanced Public Works Programme (CS-EPWP) – a programme recently implemented by the government of Malawi and funded by the World Bank – strengthen the resilience of households to climate shocks such as droughts and floods. The paper relies on case study analysis using primary qualitative data based on focus group discussions and key informant interviews with different stakeholders at the national, district and community levels. Interviews were conducted during fieldwork in September 2024 in two southern districts of Malawi highly affected by climate change. The analysis is complemented by site visits and quantitative survey data on asset quality. By combining these methods, we find that the CS-EPWP generates durable, community-maintained assets, which in turn enhance households’ capacity to cope with and adapt to climate shocks. In particular, land-based assets provide multiple benefits for both households and communities, while forest-based interventions are expected to generate similar long-term gains, though further research is needed to confirm their (long-term) impacts. To maximise the impact of climate-smart public works programmes, policymakers and donors should align asset creation with climate objectives and adopt participatory approaches to ensure their relevance, maintenance and long-term sustainability.
Sophia Schubert is an independent researcher.
Dr Donald Makoka is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Agricultural Research and Development (CARD) of the Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR) in Malawi.
One of the main arguments for implementing public works programmes (PWPs) instead of other social protection schemes such as cash transfers is that the assets created through these programmes themselves can generate medium- to long-term benefits. This is particularly important as the costs for supervision and the construction materials can account for up to 70 per cent of programme budgets. Despite this, there is scarce empirical evidence on PWPs’ effects through the “asset channel”: indeed; most studies have focused solely on the traditional “wage channel”. To bridge this gap, this paper examines whether and how assets created under Malawi’s Climate-Smart Enhanced Public Works Programme (CS-EPWP) – a programme recently implemented by the government of Malawi and funded by the World Bank – strengthen the resilience of households to climate shocks such as droughts and floods. The paper relies on case study analysis using primary qualitative data based on focus group discussions and key informant interviews with different stakeholders at the national, district and community levels. Interviews were conducted during fieldwork in September 2024 in two southern districts of Malawi highly affected by climate change. The analysis is complemented by site visits and quantitative survey data on asset quality. By combining these methods, we find that the CS-EPWP generates durable, community-maintained assets, which in turn enhance households’ capacity to cope with and adapt to climate shocks. In particular, land-based assets provide multiple benefits for both households and communities, while forest-based interventions are expected to generate similar long-term gains, though further research is needed to confirm their (long-term) impacts. To maximise the impact of climate-smart public works programmes, policymakers and donors should align asset creation with climate objectives and adopt participatory approaches to ensure their relevance, maintenance and long-term sustainability.
Sophia Schubert is an independent researcher.
Dr Donald Makoka is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Agricultural Research and Development (CARD) of the Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR) in Malawi.
One of the main arguments for implementing public works programmes (PWPs) instead of other social protection schemes such as cash transfers is that the assets created through these programmes themselves can generate medium- to long-term benefits. This is particularly important as the costs for supervision and the construction materials can account for up to 70 per cent of programme budgets. Despite this, there is scarce empirical evidence on PWPs’ effects through the “asset channel”: indeed; most studies have focused solely on the traditional “wage channel”. To bridge this gap, this paper examines whether and how assets created under Malawi’s Climate-Smart Enhanced Public Works Programme (CS-EPWP) – a programme recently implemented by the government of Malawi and funded by the World Bank – strengthen the resilience of households to climate shocks such as droughts and floods. The paper relies on case study analysis using primary qualitative data based on focus group discussions and key informant interviews with different stakeholders at the national, district and community levels. Interviews were conducted during fieldwork in September 2024 in two southern districts of Malawi highly affected by climate change. The analysis is complemented by site visits and quantitative survey data on asset quality. By combining these methods, we find that the CS-EPWP generates durable, community-maintained assets, which in turn enhance households’ capacity to cope with and adapt to climate shocks. In particular, land-based assets provide multiple benefits for both households and communities, while forest-based interventions are expected to generate similar long-term gains, though further research is needed to confirm their (long-term) impacts. To maximise the impact of climate-smart public works programmes, policymakers and donors should align asset creation with climate objectives and adopt participatory approaches to ensure their relevance, maintenance and long-term sustainability.
Sophia Schubert is an independent researcher.
Dr Donald Makoka is a Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Agricultural Research and Development (CARD) of the Lilongwe University of Agriculture and Natural Resources (LUANAR) in Malawi.
U.S. Central Command is aware of the loss of a U.S. KC-135 refueling aircraft. The incident occurred in friendly airspace during Operation Epic Fury, and rescue efforts are ongoing. Two aircraft were involved in the incident. One of the aircraft went down in western Iraq, and the…
— U.S. Central Command (@CENTCOM) March 12, 2026 God bless the crewThe G77 represents the Global South in the United Nations (UN). It holds a two-thirds majority and exercises significant influence in the General Assembly, while also being party to North–South tensions in the UN. Nearly all intergovernmental processes at the General Assembly, particularly those related to economic and financial issues, are marked by protracted and frustrating negotiations that affect the UN’s ability to develop solutions to global challenges. Despite its influence in the General Assembly, little is known about the G77’s internal processes. This article addresses this gap by examining the group’s decision making and how it shapes multilateral negotiations and outcomes in the General Assembly. It introduces an ideal-type model of intra-group interest aggregation and assesses how this function unfolds in the G77 and with what effects on UN negotiations. Drawing on group politics literature and interviews with UN delegates, the article demonstrates that while the G77 can leverage its numerical strength, there are noteworthy deficits in the group’s function of aggregating interests. Specifically, the limited inclusiveness in the group’s decision making, the dominance of a few members and the lack of informed input can undermine effective multilateralism and reinforce North–South tensions.
The G77 represents the Global South in the United Nations (UN). It holds a two-thirds majority and exercises significant influence in the General Assembly, while also being party to North–South tensions in the UN. Nearly all intergovernmental processes at the General Assembly, particularly those related to economic and financial issues, are marked by protracted and frustrating negotiations that affect the UN’s ability to develop solutions to global challenges. Despite its influence in the General Assembly, little is known about the G77’s internal processes. This article addresses this gap by examining the group’s decision making and how it shapes multilateral negotiations and outcomes in the General Assembly. It introduces an ideal-type model of intra-group interest aggregation and assesses how this function unfolds in the G77 and with what effects on UN negotiations. Drawing on group politics literature and interviews with UN delegates, the article demonstrates that while the G77 can leverage its numerical strength, there are noteworthy deficits in the group’s function of aggregating interests. Specifically, the limited inclusiveness in the group’s decision making, the dominance of a few members and the lack of informed input can undermine effective multilateralism and reinforce North–South tensions.
The G77 represents the Global South in the United Nations (UN). It holds a two-thirds majority and exercises significant influence in the General Assembly, while also being party to North–South tensions in the UN. Nearly all intergovernmental processes at the General Assembly, particularly those related to economic and financial issues, are marked by protracted and frustrating negotiations that affect the UN’s ability to develop solutions to global challenges. Despite its influence in the General Assembly, little is known about the G77’s internal processes. This article addresses this gap by examining the group’s decision making and how it shapes multilateral negotiations and outcomes in the General Assembly. It introduces an ideal-type model of intra-group interest aggregation and assesses how this function unfolds in the G77 and with what effects on UN negotiations. Drawing on group politics literature and interviews with UN delegates, the article demonstrates that while the G77 can leverage its numerical strength, there are noteworthy deficits in the group’s function of aggregating interests. Specifically, the limited inclusiveness in the group’s decision making, the dominance of a few members and the lack of informed input can undermine effective multilateralism and reinforce North–South tensions.
In the coastal zone, the triple planetary crisis manifests as accelerating losses and changes and increasing challenges and risks for people and livelihoods. Acceptance of a future existential crisis compels the urgency of corrective action to cause an inverse positive societal response to bend the negative trajectories of loss and damage. The rate and extent of corrective societal action (policies, laws, practices, knowledge, etc.) should at least keep pace with the projected rate of loss and environmental degradation. This urgency and acceleration of action are major societal challenges, especially considering the overwhelming evidence of impacts. In this paper, we offer three propositions for accelerating urgent actions and fostering innovation in coastal research and management, focusing on emerging trends and foundational changes. Scientists need to (1) reflect on the performativity of their research and perceptions of neutrality in anticipating the future of coasts; (2) think and act equitably in local and global partnerships; and (3) improve their engagement and willingness to innovate with society. This is not a call for linear or incremental change, but a call for the radical. The relationship between society and science drives progress and shapes our collective future.
In the coastal zone, the triple planetary crisis manifests as accelerating losses and changes and increasing challenges and risks for people and livelihoods. Acceptance of a future existential crisis compels the urgency of corrective action to cause an inverse positive societal response to bend the negative trajectories of loss and damage. The rate and extent of corrective societal action (policies, laws, practices, knowledge, etc.) should at least keep pace with the projected rate of loss and environmental degradation. This urgency and acceleration of action are major societal challenges, especially considering the overwhelming evidence of impacts. In this paper, we offer three propositions for accelerating urgent actions and fostering innovation in coastal research and management, focusing on emerging trends and foundational changes. Scientists need to (1) reflect on the performativity of their research and perceptions of neutrality in anticipating the future of coasts; (2) think and act equitably in local and global partnerships; and (3) improve their engagement and willingness to innovate with society. This is not a call for linear or incremental change, but a call for the radical. The relationship between society and science drives progress and shapes our collective future.
In the coastal zone, the triple planetary crisis manifests as accelerating losses and changes and increasing challenges and risks for people and livelihoods. Acceptance of a future existential crisis compels the urgency of corrective action to cause an inverse positive societal response to bend the negative trajectories of loss and damage. The rate and extent of corrective societal action (policies, laws, practices, knowledge, etc.) should at least keep pace with the projected rate of loss and environmental degradation. This urgency and acceleration of action are major societal challenges, especially considering the overwhelming evidence of impacts. In this paper, we offer three propositions for accelerating urgent actions and fostering innovation in coastal research and management, focusing on emerging trends and foundational changes. Scientists need to (1) reflect on the performativity of their research and perceptions of neutrality in anticipating the future of coasts; (2) think and act equitably in local and global partnerships; and (3) improve their engagement and willingness to innovate with society. This is not a call for linear or incremental change, but a call for the radical. The relationship between society and science drives progress and shapes our collective future.
Deutschland stellt sich thematisch zu breit auf in einer sich neu ausrichtenden Weltordnung. Das zeigt sich besonders in der Entwicklungspolitik, die als Instrument deutscher Außenpolitik und internationaler Zusammenarbeit dort eingesetzt werden sollte, wo Wirkung realistisch nachgewiesen ist.