This paper investigates the impact of aid for trade (AfT) targeted at trade policies on the participation of recipient countries in global value chains (GVCs), and how this impact varies with their prevailing political regimes. In democratic countries, the need for the authorities to account for the interests of various stakeholders (e.g., lobbies, trade unions) can compromise the allocation, use, and effectiveness of AfT. In contrast, less democratic regimes are typically more insulated from political pressures, which may lead to more effective outcomes of aid. At the same time, integration into some complex GVCs requires efficient and democratic institutions, to which these products are sensitive. Employing a sample of 110 countries and data covering 2002-2018, we control for standard determinants of GVC participation, while examining the effect of AfT and the moderating role of the political regime in place. Our estimation addresses the endogeneity of aid through an appropriate instrumentation strategy. Our results suggest that the effect of AfT is mostly positive in autocratic regimes, indicating more effective trade policy reforms. When we account for regional disparities, we find evidence that AfT for trade policy is also impactful in some democratic regimes. This might suggest that the efficacy of AfT is not strictly regime-dependent, but hinges on the government’s commitment to carry out significant reforms leading to greater participation in the global economy.
This paper investigates the impact of aid for trade (AfT) targeted at trade policies on the participation of recipient countries in global value chains (GVCs), and how this impact varies with their prevailing political regimes. In democratic countries, the need for the authorities to account for the interests of various stakeholders (e.g., lobbies, trade unions) can compromise the allocation, use, and effectiveness of AfT. In contrast, less democratic regimes are typically more insulated from political pressures, which may lead to more effective outcomes of aid. At the same time, integration into some complex GVCs requires efficient and democratic institutions, to which these products are sensitive. Employing a sample of 110 countries and data covering 2002-2018, we control for standard determinants of GVC participation, while examining the effect of AfT and the moderating role of the political regime in place. Our estimation addresses the endogeneity of aid through an appropriate instrumentation strategy. Our results suggest that the effect of AfT is mostly positive in autocratic regimes, indicating more effective trade policy reforms. When we account for regional disparities, we find evidence that AfT for trade policy is also impactful in some democratic regimes. This might suggest that the efficacy of AfT is not strictly regime-dependent, but hinges on the government’s commitment to carry out significant reforms leading to greater participation in the global economy.
This paper investigates the impact of aid for trade (AfT) targeted at trade policies on the participation of recipient countries in global value chains (GVCs), and how this impact varies with their prevailing political regimes. In democratic countries, the need for the authorities to account for the interests of various stakeholders (e.g., lobbies, trade unions) can compromise the allocation, use, and effectiveness of AfT. In contrast, less democratic regimes are typically more insulated from political pressures, which may lead to more effective outcomes of aid. At the same time, integration into some complex GVCs requires efficient and democratic institutions, to which these products are sensitive. Employing a sample of 110 countries and data covering 2002-2018, we control for standard determinants of GVC participation, while examining the effect of AfT and the moderating role of the political regime in place. Our estimation addresses the endogeneity of aid through an appropriate instrumentation strategy. Our results suggest that the effect of AfT is mostly positive in autocratic regimes, indicating more effective trade policy reforms. When we account for regional disparities, we find evidence that AfT for trade policy is also impactful in some democratic regimes. This might suggest that the efficacy of AfT is not strictly regime-dependent, but hinges on the government’s commitment to carry out significant reforms leading to greater participation in the global economy.
Many colonies in Africa attained independence through negotiated settlements. However, several others engaged in armed liberation struggles, for example, Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), and the Portuguese colonies of Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, and São Tomé and Príncipe. Newly independent states provided liberation movements with bases on their territories and political, military, intellectual, ideological, material, and moral support. In West Africa, Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah, a notable pan-Africanist, declared in his Independence Day speech in 1957, “Our independence is meaningless unless it is linked up with the total liberation of the African continent.” In East Africa, Julius Nyerere and Jomo Kenyatta, the first presidents of independent Tanzania and Kenya respectively, showed similar commitment to Pan-Africanism and anticolonialism by hosting refugees fleeing armed struggles in Southern Africa. Tanzania hosted the Organization of African Unity Liberation Committee supported anticolonial resistance and liberation movements. President Nyerere supported them for “challenging injustices of empire and apartheid” and declared, “I train freedom fighters”. He encouraged Tanzanians living around liberation movement camps to welcome these movements and their freedom fighters and also protect them from agents of colonial governments. Support also came from many other countries on the continent including Nigeria, Ethiopia, and Algeria. The latter provided sanctuary to representatives of liberation movements such as Nelson Mandela of the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa.
Many colonies in Africa attained independence through negotiated settlements. However, several others engaged in armed liberation struggles, for example, Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), and the Portuguese colonies of Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, and São Tomé and Príncipe. Newly independent states provided liberation movements with bases on their territories and political, military, intellectual, ideological, material, and moral support. In West Africa, Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah, a notable pan-Africanist, declared in his Independence Day speech in 1957, “Our independence is meaningless unless it is linked up with the total liberation of the African continent.” In East Africa, Julius Nyerere and Jomo Kenyatta, the first presidents of independent Tanzania and Kenya respectively, showed similar commitment to Pan-Africanism and anticolonialism by hosting refugees fleeing armed struggles in Southern Africa. Tanzania hosted the Organization of African Unity Liberation Committee supported anticolonial resistance and liberation movements. President Nyerere supported them for “challenging injustices of empire and apartheid” and declared, “I train freedom fighters”. He encouraged Tanzanians living around liberation movement camps to welcome these movements and their freedom fighters and also protect them from agents of colonial governments. Support also came from many other countries on the continent including Nigeria, Ethiopia, and Algeria. The latter provided sanctuary to representatives of liberation movements such as Nelson Mandela of the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa.
Many colonies in Africa attained independence through negotiated settlements. However, several others engaged in armed liberation struggles, for example, Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), and the Portuguese colonies of Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau, Mozambique, and São Tomé and Príncipe. Newly independent states provided liberation movements with bases on their territories and political, military, intellectual, ideological, material, and moral support. In West Africa, Ghana’s first president, Kwame Nkrumah, a notable pan-Africanist, declared in his Independence Day speech in 1957, “Our independence is meaningless unless it is linked up with the total liberation of the African continent.” In East Africa, Julius Nyerere and Jomo Kenyatta, the first presidents of independent Tanzania and Kenya respectively, showed similar commitment to Pan-Africanism and anticolonialism by hosting refugees fleeing armed struggles in Southern Africa. Tanzania hosted the Organization of African Unity Liberation Committee supported anticolonial resistance and liberation movements. President Nyerere supported them for “challenging injustices of empire and apartheid” and declared, “I train freedom fighters”. He encouraged Tanzanians living around liberation movement camps to welcome these movements and their freedom fighters and also protect them from agents of colonial governments. Support also came from many other countries on the continent including Nigeria, Ethiopia, and Algeria. The latter provided sanctuary to representatives of liberation movements such as Nelson Mandela of the African National Congress (ANC) in South Africa.
Au début du 18e siècle, la France, la Suède et l'Empire ottoman nouent un réseau d'alliances où la diplomatie ouvre la voie à l'imaginaire. À travers peintures, dessins, estampes et aquarelles, l'exposition explore ces circulations artistiques et culturelles.
Au 18ᵉ siècle, les relations entre Occident et Orient s'apaisent après de longs siècles marqués par les conflits armés. La France, la Suède et l'Empire ottoman s'allient contre les ennemis communs que sont la Russie et l'Autriche. Les (…)
Lors de cet atelier, nous étudierons des airs et des chants de la région élargie d'Asie Mineure et la manière dont le répertoire correspondant a été intégré et domestiqué, principalement dans les îles du nord-est de la mer Égée et des Cyclades.
À travers le répertoire et la pratique, nous étudierons les points communs et les différences stylistiques de ces régions spécifiques. Parallèlement, l'analyse des chants et des airs nous permettra d'identifier les caractéristiques (développement (…)
Artiste bulgare et figure reconnue dans le domaine de la médaille d'art contemporain, Nadia Rozeva offre un aperçu de sa sensibilité unique à travers 50 œuvres créées entre 2002 et 2026.
Intime par nature et conçue pour être touchée, la médaille est une forme sculpturale de petite dimension, à la fois puissante et singulière. C'est un récit tactile, où la perception de son poids physique offre un ancrage sensoriel aux thèmes explorés et rend l'abstrait tangible.
Par le langage laconique (…)
A smoke- free UN corridor. Credit: IPS
By Thalif Deen
UNITED NATIONS, Aug 19 2026 (IPS)
When smoking was common in the corridors of the UN, in the delegate’s lounge and in committee rooms during the 1970s and 90s, the office of the Secretary-General sent a memo that read: “Smoking was Discouraged” in the UN building—sounding far short of a ban.
The Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov (1994-2004), currently the country’s Foreign Minister, left a Security Council meeting and pulled out a cigarette in the presence of half a dozen reporters waiting for him outside the chamber.
As he approached the reporters, one of them told him that the Secretary-General had banned smoking in the building. And Lavrov shot back: “This building does not belong to the Secretary-General. It belongs to member states: he said, as he lit his cigarette.
And Lavrov was dead on target.
The ban on smoking became effective only after the 193-member General Assembly adopted a resolution back in 2008—18 years ago.
Under Resolution 63/8 and Secretariat Information Circular ST/IC/2016/10, the United Nations enforced a complete ban on indoor smoking and the sale of tobacco products across all UN Headquarters premises. Smoking and vaping were restricted exclusively to designated, signposted open-air areas.
But apparently there were violations of the ban.
A new circular released last week by the UN’s Media and Liaison Unit (MALU) has reiterated the ban on smoking– and well ahead of the arrival of thousands of delegates who will be at the UN for the General Assembly sessions in mid-September.
“Please remember: terraces, verandas, entrances and other outdoor spaces are not automatically smoking areas. Smoking and vaping should take place only where the area is specifically designated and clearly marked”.
The World Health Organization (WHO), says the circular, states that there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke and that fully smoke-free environments provide the most effective protection.
Even brief exposure can affect cardiovascular and respiratory health, particularly for people with asthma, cardiovascular disease, other respiratory conditions, or heightened sensitivity to smoke.
Second-hand smoke can drift beyond the person smoking and affect colleagues, delegates, visitors and service personnel who have not chosen to be exposed. Vape aerosol may also contain nicotine, ultrafine particles and other potentially harmful substances; for this reason, vaping is subject to the same UNHQ restrictions.
According to WHO, a UN agency based in Geneva, tobacco damages nearly every organ in the body, causing cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung disease, reduced fertility, weakened immunity and premature death.
The tobacco epidemic, says WHO, is one of the biggest public health threats the world has ever faced, responsible for over 7 million deaths annually as well as disability and long-term suffering from tobacco-related diseases.
Tobacco use is a major risk factor for cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, over 20 different types or subtypes of cancer, and many other debilitating health conditions.
All forms of tobacco use are harmful, and there is no safe level of exposure to tobacco. Cigarette smoking is the most common form of tobacco use worldwide. Other tobacco products include waterpipe tobacco, cigars, cigarillos, heated tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, pipe tobacco, bidis and kreteks, and smokeless tobacco products.
Nicotine is highly addictive and harmful, particularly for children, adolescents and young adults whose brains are still developing. Nicotine exposure during adolescence can affect brain development, including impacts on attention and learning.
Early nicotine use can increase the likelihood of long-term dependence and future use of other nicotine and tobacco products. Nicotine use also increases cardiovascular risk, the WHO warned.
“Around 80% of the 1.2 billion tobacco users worldwide live in low- and middle-income countries (2), where the burden of tobacco-related illness and death is heaviest. Tobacco use contributes to poverty by diverting household spending from basic needs such as food and shelter to tobacco. This spending behaviour is difficult to curb because tobacco is very addictive”.
The economic costs of tobacco use are substantial and include significant health care costs for treating the diseases caused by tobacco use, as well as the lost human capital that results from tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality.
IPS UN Bureau Report
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
La star de la musique béninoise, Angélique Kidjo a reçu son étoile sur le Hollywood Walk of Fame dans la soirée de ce mardi 18 août 2026 à Los Angeles.
Nouvelle distinction pour Angélique Kidjo. Elle a reçu ce mardi 18 août 2026, son étoile sur le Hollywood Walk of Fame. Cette distinction fait d'elle, la première artiste africaine de l'histoire à être immortalisée sur le Hollywood Walk of Fame dans la catégorie « enregistrement ».
Cette nouvelle distinction vient consacrer quatre décennies d'une carrière internationale exceptionnelle au cours de laquelle l'artiste a fait rayonner la musique africaine sur les plus grandes scènes internationales.
La cérémonie officielle de remise a eu lieu en présence d'une délégation du gouvernement béninois représenté par le ministre de la Culture, des Arts, et du Patrimoine, Yassine Latoundji, et l'ambassadeur du Bénin aux Etats-Unis, Agniola Ahouanmenou.
Quelques images de la cérémonie officielle de remise d'étoile
By CIVICUS
Aug 19 2026 (IPS)
CIVICUS discusses the state of civic and humanitarian action in Gaza with Ibrahim Arandas, a Palestinian activist and project manager at SPARK Gaza, a civil society organisation that provides humanitarian and psychosocial support.
Ibrahim Arandas
Israel’s onslaught on Gaza, which began in October 2023, forced most people from their homes and left almost everyone reliant on humanitarian aid. A much-breached ceasefire that began on 10 October 2025 allowed more aid to enter, but conditions remain dire. Throughout the war, local civil society organisations, grassroots volunteers and international partners have worked to try to provide humanitarian support.What’s life like for people in Gaza now, and what needs are most urgent?
Today, life is defined by scarcity and uncertainty. Israel has turned Gaza into something far worse than a concentration camp. It has engineered a system designed not just to confine and suffocate an entire population, but to erode people’s lives day after day, generation by generation. This is not a simple military operation but deliberate, prolonged destruction, calibrated to keep people alive, but just enough to avoid global outrage while denying every basic condition of human dignity.
The psychological toll is enormous. Aid agencies report that anxiety and severe helplessness have become the norm rather than the exception, particularly among families who have lost their homes, routines and support networks. Our most urgent needs are clean water, healthcare, shelter and mental health support.
What has changed and what obstacles to humanitarian work remain?
When the ceasefire was announced, we thought it meant the end of the war and the suffering. Before the war, two million of us lived across Gaza. We have lost friends and family, and now live in just 36 per cent of the territory.
The hardest issue we face is reaching vulnerable people with the aid they need, including basic supplies, healthcare and mental health support. Patients need healthcare, but our teams cannot reach them. Israel makes movement between areas extremely hard, particularly during periods of escalation, when near-constant closures and limited crossings determine who enters and leaves Gaza.
This is a high-risk, complex environment and we have to stay adaptive to reach the sites and people who depend on us. Every movement implies high risk, but there’s no risk register.
How has your organisation’s work evolved?
We have grown. Gaza has lived through many wars, but we’d never faced conditions like these. In Gaza, you can’t plan a month or two ahead. Things collapse, and the plan has to be redesigned every day.
In our European Union-funded project, we had to constantly redesign how we deliver programming, shifting activities and timelines and sometimes moving sessions online, because access to project sites and young people can change from week to week depending on movement restrictions and security conditions.
We work under constant uncertainty, with internet and network cut-offs overnight and contact with front-line workers lost within an hour. From this, we learned and adapted existing global standards to our context. I developed and published a framework I call ‘adaptive conflict project management’, useful for working in conflict-affected areas like Gaza. It sets out how to build a risk plan, delegate to frontline workers rather than only leaders, divide projects across areas because movement is restricted and keep every worker feeling safe and supported.
How has civil society sustained the response and what support does it need?
Coordination has been essential. One of our few sources of resilience is local organising, combined with international partners who bring resources and access to global platforms like CIVICUS. The combination of local knowledge and international backing has kept civic and humanitarian work alive under the most difficult conditions.
As a frontline worker, what I believe is most needed is sustained access. It’s not just about the volume of aid, but about the ability to plan around consistent access to people and areas. We also need investment in local capacity, not only emergency relief, so Gaza’s civil society can lead the recovery rather than only respond to the crisis. We want to lead this recovery and think beyond emergency relief.
CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.
GET IN TOUCH
Website
Facebook
Instagram
Ibrahim Arandas/Facebook
Ibrahim Arandas/Instagram
Ibrahim Arandas/LinkedIn
SEE ALSO
Gaza: ceasefire an illusion CIVICUS Lens | Article 15.Mar.2026
Gaza: ‘Humanitarian aid matters for survival, but its dynamics diminish Palestinian agency’ CIVICUS Lens | Interview with Ali Abdel-Wahab 16.Feb.2026
‘Life in Gaza’s shelters is marked by deprivation – but also by the endurance of human dignity’ CIVICUS Lens | Anonymous interview 12.Aug.2025
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau