Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

This research explores how epistemological dissonance shapes agrarian sustainabilities in Mbeya, Tanzania. Through a case study of smallholder farmers navigating both market-driven and eco-cultural paradigms of sustainability, the research explores how plural epistemologies shape local sensemaking and agricultural decision-making. It demonstrates how farmers reconcile divergent sustainability logics, those rooted in market interpretations of sustainability with those rooted in relational ethics, ecological stewardship, and cultural continuity within agrarian landscapes. Employing hybrid strategies, farmers compartmentalize production, input intensive, market-targeting monocultures co-exist alongside primarily subsistence agroecological systems. These spatial divisions mirror deeper ontological tensions, as farmers articulate pride in market breakthroughs while expressing anxiety about environmental degradation, cultural erosion, and the loss of intergenerational practices. Building on plural sustainabilities literature and epistemologies of the South theories, the paper adds to scholarship reinterpreting sustainability not as a universal, singular paradigm, but a contested, contextually negotiated process. The case of Mbeya illustrates how epistemological dissonance becomes embodied through emotional and cognitive labor, and how hybrid sensemaking enables farmers to navigate conflicting knowledge systems. Rather than viewing hybridity as incoherence, the paper interprets these strategies as acts of situated resilience, adaptation, and resistance. The analysis contributes to political ecology and sustainability studies by foregrounding the ontological multiplicity at play in agrarian transitions and calls for institutional recognition of knowledge pluralism. Ultimately, the paper proposes a shift toward pluriversal sustainability frameworks that integrate both empirical and relational epistemologies, acknowledging that sustainable futures are as much about values and worldviews as they are about technologies and yields.

This research explores how epistemological dissonance shapes agrarian sustainabilities in Mbeya, Tanzania. Through a case study of smallholder farmers navigating both market-driven and eco-cultural paradigms of sustainability, the research explores how plural epistemologies shape local sensemaking and agricultural decision-making. It demonstrates how farmers reconcile divergent sustainability logics, those rooted in market interpretations of sustainability with those rooted in relational ethics, ecological stewardship, and cultural continuity within agrarian landscapes. Employing hybrid strategies, farmers compartmentalize production, input intensive, market-targeting monocultures co-exist alongside primarily subsistence agroecological systems. These spatial divisions mirror deeper ontological tensions, as farmers articulate pride in market breakthroughs while expressing anxiety about environmental degradation, cultural erosion, and the loss of intergenerational practices. Building on plural sustainabilities literature and epistemologies of the South theories, the paper adds to scholarship reinterpreting sustainability not as a universal, singular paradigm, but a contested, contextually negotiated process. The case of Mbeya illustrates how epistemological dissonance becomes embodied through emotional and cognitive labor, and how hybrid sensemaking enables farmers to navigate conflicting knowledge systems. Rather than viewing hybridity as incoherence, the paper interprets these strategies as acts of situated resilience, adaptation, and resistance. The analysis contributes to political ecology and sustainability studies by foregrounding the ontological multiplicity at play in agrarian transitions and calls for institutional recognition of knowledge pluralism. Ultimately, the paper proposes a shift toward pluriversal sustainability frameworks that integrate both empirical and relational epistemologies, acknowledging that sustainable futures are as much about values and worldviews as they are about technologies and yields.

The European Think Tanks Group and the German Institute for Development and Sustainability (IDOS) teamed up with the Istanbul Policy Center to organise a public seminar and a closed-door workshop to explore how three key actors – Turkey, the European Union and China – are responding to the above trends and changes. Comparing their current policies, agendas, and past practices provided a means to explore whether their approaches to international cooperation, particularly in the context of their engagements with the Global South, are converging (or diverging) during today’s turbulent times, and to determine the scope and relevance of further comparative research. This blog post highlights some key points of what was discussed and links them to current academic and policy debates.

The European Think Tanks Group and the German Institute for Development and Sustainability (IDOS) teamed up with the Istanbul Policy Center to organise a public seminar and a closed-door workshop to explore how three key actors – Turkey, the European Union and China – are responding to the above trends and changes. Comparing their current policies, agendas, and past practices provided a means to explore whether their approaches to international cooperation, particularly in the context of their engagements with the Global South, are converging (or diverging) during today’s turbulent times, and to determine the scope and relevance of further comparative research. This blog post highlights some key points of what was discussed and links them to current academic and policy debates.

The European Think Tanks Group and the German Institute for Development and Sustainability (IDOS) teamed up with the Istanbul Policy Center to organise a public seminar and a closed-door workshop to explore how three key actors – Turkey, the European Union and China – are responding to the above trends and changes. Comparing their current policies, agendas, and past practices provided a means to explore whether their approaches to international cooperation, particularly in the context of their engagements with the Global South, are converging (or diverging) during today’s turbulent times, and to determine the scope and relevance of further comparative research. This blog post highlights some key points of what was discussed and links them to current academic and policy debates.

Milliardenerbschaften bleiben oft steuerfrei. Eine Reform der Erbschaftsteuer erfordert keine Revolution, aber gezielte Veränderungen für mehr Fairness und Effizienz. , Die Debatte über die Erbschaftsteuer flammt alle paar Jahre wieder auf – meist wenn das Bundesverfassungsgericht droht, das nächste Loch in das ohnehin löchrige Regelwerk zu reißen. Schnell fordern manche eine grundlegende Reform, andere eine Abschaffung der Steuer und wieder andere eine Erhöhung ...

Despite the potential of renewable hydrogen to galvanize economies and climate action, governments and development banks often lack a coherent framework to assess and approve hydrogen projects on sustainability grounds. Decision-making processes regarding land allocation, permitting and infrastructure access remain fragmented, increasing the risof extractive investment models that provide limited local benefits while causing environmental harm. Transparent, universally accepted sustainability guidelines can help decision makers select project partners that align with their respective priorities and objectives, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Moreover, such a framework can enhance investor confidence and public trust by ensuring that hydrogen projects deliver tangible socioeconomic benefits to host communities. Recognizing this need, a broad coalition of stakeholders has collaborate to develop the Guidelines for Sustainable Hydrogen Projects, integrating expertise from multiple disciplines to create a flexible yet comprehensive decision-making tool. The Guidelines serve as a reference for governments, development banks and other stakeholders in evaluating hydrogen project proposals. Rather than prescribing rigid requirements, they provide a non-exhaustive set of criteria that can be adapted to local contexts. The Guidelines emphasize maximizing domestic value creation while safeguarding environmental and social standards. Applicable to large-scale projects with a minimum capacity of 200 megawatts (MW) - including renewable electricity generation, water desalination, electrolysis, and related infrastructure - they help ensure that hydrogen investments contribute to long-term sustainable development. By aligning with the SDGs, they promote inclusive economic growth, responsible resource management and climate action.

Despite the potential of renewable hydrogen to galvanize economies and climate action, governments and development banks often lack a coherent framework to assess and approve hydrogen projects on sustainability grounds. Decision-making processes regarding land allocation, permitting and infrastructure access remain fragmented, increasing the risof extractive investment models that provide limited local benefits while causing environmental harm. Transparent, universally accepted sustainability guidelines can help decision makers select project partners that align with their respective priorities and objectives, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Moreover, such a framework can enhance investor confidence and public trust by ensuring that hydrogen projects deliver tangible socioeconomic benefits to host communities. Recognizing this need, a broad coalition of stakeholders has collaborate to develop the Guidelines for Sustainable Hydrogen Projects, integrating expertise from multiple disciplines to create a flexible yet comprehensive decision-making tool. The Guidelines serve as a reference for governments, development banks and other stakeholders in evaluating hydrogen project proposals. Rather than prescribing rigid requirements, they provide a non-exhaustive set of criteria that can be adapted to local contexts. The Guidelines emphasize maximizing domestic value creation while safeguarding environmental and social standards. Applicable to large-scale projects with a minimum capacity of 200 megawatts (MW) - including renewable electricity generation, water desalination, electrolysis, and related infrastructure - they help ensure that hydrogen investments contribute to long-term sustainable development. By aligning with the SDGs, they promote inclusive economic growth, responsible resource management and climate action.

Despite the potential of renewable hydrogen to galvanize economies and climate action, governments and development banks often lack a coherent framework to assess and approve hydrogen projects on sustainability grounds. Decision-making processes regarding land allocation, permitting and infrastructure access remain fragmented, increasing the risof extractive investment models that provide limited local benefits while causing environmental harm. Transparent, universally accepted sustainability guidelines can help decision makers select project partners that align with their respective priorities and objectives, including the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Moreover, such a framework can enhance investor confidence and public trust by ensuring that hydrogen projects deliver tangible socioeconomic benefits to host communities. Recognizing this need, a broad coalition of stakeholders has collaborate to develop the Guidelines for Sustainable Hydrogen Projects, integrating expertise from multiple disciplines to create a flexible yet comprehensive decision-making tool. The Guidelines serve as a reference for governments, development banks and other stakeholders in evaluating hydrogen project proposals. Rather than prescribing rigid requirements, they provide a non-exhaustive set of criteria that can be adapted to local contexts. The Guidelines emphasize maximizing domestic value creation while safeguarding environmental and social standards. Applicable to large-scale projects with a minimum capacity of 200 megawatts (MW) - including renewable electricity generation, water desalination, electrolysis, and related infrastructure - they help ensure that hydrogen investments contribute to long-term sustainable development. By aligning with the SDGs, they promote inclusive economic growth, responsible resource management and climate action.

Technological change, an overwhelming fact in recent socioeconomic history, involves, as Joseph A. Schumpeter famously put it, “creative destruction” on a large scale: it gives rise to new goods, production methods, firms, organisations, and jobs, while rendering some received ones obsolete. Its impact extends beyond the economy and affects society, culture, politics, and the mind-set of people. While it allows solving certain problems, it causes new ones, inducing further technological change. Against this background, the paper attempts to provide a detailed, yet concise exploration of the historical evolution and measurement of technological change in economics. It touches upon various questions that have been raised since Adam Smith and by economic and social theorists after him until today living through several waves of new technologies. These questions include: (1) Which concepts and theories did the leading authors elaborate to describe and analyse the various forms of technological progress they observed? (2) Did they think that different forms of technological progress requested the elaboration of different concepts and theories – horses for courses, so to speak? (3) How do different forms of technological progress affect and are shaped by various strata and classes of society? Issues such as these have become particularly crucial in the context of the digitisation of the economy and the widespread use of AI. Finally, the paper explores the impact of emerging technologies on the established theoretical frameworks and empirical measurements of technological change, points to new measurements linked to the rise of these technologies, and evaluates their pros and cons vis-à-vis traditional approaches.

Technological change, an overwhelming fact in recent socioeconomic history, involves, as Joseph A. Schumpeter famously put it, “creative destruction” on a large scale: it gives rise to new goods, production methods, firms, organisations, and jobs, while rendering some received ones obsolete. Its impact extends beyond the economy and affects society, culture, politics, and the mind-set of people. While it allows solving certain problems, it causes new ones, inducing further technological change. Against this background, the paper attempts to provide a detailed, yet concise exploration of the historical evolution and measurement of technological change in economics. It touches upon various questions that have been raised since Adam Smith and by economic and social theorists after him until today living through several waves of new technologies. These questions include: (1) Which concepts and theories did the leading authors elaborate to describe and analyse the various forms of technological progress they observed? (2) Did they think that different forms of technological progress requested the elaboration of different concepts and theories – horses for courses, so to speak? (3) How do different forms of technological progress affect and are shaped by various strata and classes of society? Issues such as these have become particularly crucial in the context of the digitisation of the economy and the widespread use of AI. Finally, the paper explores the impact of emerging technologies on the established theoretical frameworks and empirical measurements of technological change, points to new measurements linked to the rise of these technologies, and evaluates their pros and cons vis-à-vis traditional approaches.

Technological change, an overwhelming fact in recent socioeconomic history, involves, as Joseph A. Schumpeter famously put it, “creative destruction” on a large scale: it gives rise to new goods, production methods, firms, organisations, and jobs, while rendering some received ones obsolete. Its impact extends beyond the economy and affects society, culture, politics, and the mind-set of people. While it allows solving certain problems, it causes new ones, inducing further technological change. Against this background, the paper attempts to provide a detailed, yet concise exploration of the historical evolution and measurement of technological change in economics. It touches upon various questions that have been raised since Adam Smith and by economic and social theorists after him until today living through several waves of new technologies. These questions include: (1) Which concepts and theories did the leading authors elaborate to describe and analyse the various forms of technological progress they observed? (2) Did they think that different forms of technological progress requested the elaboration of different concepts and theories – horses for courses, so to speak? (3) How do different forms of technological progress affect and are shaped by various strata and classes of society? Issues such as these have become particularly crucial in the context of the digitisation of the economy and the widespread use of AI. Finally, the paper explores the impact of emerging technologies on the established theoretical frameworks and empirical measurements of technological change, points to new measurements linked to the rise of these technologies, and evaluates their pros and cons vis-à-vis traditional approaches.

Der

Der

Die SOEP Innovations-Stichprobe (SOEP-IS) verfolgt das Ziel, innovative Datenerhebung für die Wissenschafts-Community zu ermöglichen und eignet sich daher in besonderem Maße für die Etablierung neuer und zielgruppenspezifischer Messinstrumente in Langzeiterhebungen, für Kurz- und Langzeitexperimente ...

Die SOEP Innovations-Stichprobe (SOEP-IS) verfolgt das Ziel, innovative Datenerhebung für die Wissenschafts-Community zu ermöglichen und eignet sich daher in besonderem Maße für die Etablierung neuer und zielgruppenspezifischer Messinstrumente in Langzeiterhebungen, für Kurz- und Langzeitexperimente ...

Lorsqu’on souscrit un crédit immobilier, il est impératif de bien connaître les enjeux, car il s’agit d’un engagement financier important qui s’étale la plupart du temps sur plusieurs décennies. Malgré cela, nombreux sont les profils à se soucier uniquement du taux d’intérêt de leurs prêts en négligeant un élément pourtant très important : l’assurance emprunteur. ...

Lire la suite

Source

In this issue of MORE, the focus is on Greek–Albanian relations between March and October 2024, shaped by the Fredi Beleris case—a local legal dispute that evolved into a major diplomatic and media controversy. Beleris, mayor-elect of Himara, was convicted for electoral corruption but later elected to the European Parliament for Greece’s New Democracy party, intensifying tensions over democracy, minority rights, and judicial independence.

In Albania, pro-government media framed his conviction as proof of judicial reform, while opposition outlets denounced it as political persecution. In Greece, coverage was overwhelmingly sympathetic, portraying Beleris as a political prisoner. Widespread misinformation—including fake stories and manipulated images—deepened mistrust and polarization.

Tensions peaked during Beleris’s October 2024 visit to Tirana as an MEP, marked by protests and symbolic confrontation. Yet, by late 2024, relations began to improve, aided by Albania’s post-election pro-EU stance and significant progress in EU accession, with five of six negotiation clusters opened.

Covering the period from March to October 2024, MORE 6 shows how one legal case exposed the fragility of regional trust, but also how diplomatic pragmatism and the shared goal of European integration can turn confrontation into cooperation.

The Media Observatory Reports are part of the broader “ALGREE – Albania–Greece: Understanding. Connecting. Partnering” project, implemented by the South-East Europe Programme of the Hellenic Foundation for Foreign & European Policy (ELIAMEP) with support from the Open Society Foundations – Western Balkans and the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom Greece and Cyprus. Based on systematic monitoring of leading Albanian and Greek media, the reports examine how each country portrays the other and how media narratives shape mutual perceptions and shared regional agendas.

Michalis Mathioulakis, Energy Strategy Analyst, Academic Director of the Greek Energy Forum and ELIAMEP Research Associate , explains how the 6th Ministerial Meeting of the Partnership for Transatlantic Energy Cooperation (P-TEC), held in Athens in November 2025, highlighted the emergence of a new transatlantic energy architecture with Greece at its center, serving as the key Mediterranean entry point for U.S. gas flows to Southeast Europe and Ukraine.

Read the ELIAMEP Explainer here.