Diplomacy & Defense Think Tank News

The global development architecture is under the spotlight. This refers to the broad architecture of actors, norms, instruments and institutions that mobilise and coordinate resources, knowledge and political support for development goals. Within this system, Official Development Assistance (ODA) is a core financial instrument, primarily provided by OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) DAC (Development Assistance Committee) members. It functions alongside other modalities such as South–South cooperation, climate finance, philanthropic aid and private-sector engagement.

The global development architecture is under the spotlight. This refers to the broad architecture of actors, norms, instruments and institutions that mobilise and coordinate resources, knowledge and political support for development goals. Within this system, Official Development Assistance (ODA) is a core financial instrument, primarily provided by OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) DAC (Development Assistance Committee) members. It functions alongside other modalities such as South–South cooperation, climate finance, philanthropic aid and private-sector engagement.

We argue that following the rise of new partners such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kenya’s problem is no longer access to finance, but rather the governance of finance. In other words, the question is not simply how much money the country can borrow or from whom, but whether its institutions are capable of turning loans into productive investments rather than patronage networks. As the debt burden mounts, Kenya’s ability to prevent growing options for economic partnerships from undermining domestic accountability will determine whether its infrastructure boom becomes a foundation for long-term development or a monument to short-term political ambition.

We argue that following the rise of new partners such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kenya’s problem is no longer access to finance, but rather the governance of finance. In other words, the question is not simply how much money the country can borrow or from whom, but whether its institutions are capable of turning loans into productive investments rather than patronage networks. As the debt burden mounts, Kenya’s ability to prevent growing options for economic partnerships from undermining domestic accountability will determine whether its infrastructure boom becomes a foundation for long-term development or a monument to short-term political ambition.

We argue that following the rise of new partners such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kenya’s problem is no longer access to finance, but rather the governance of finance. In other words, the question is not simply how much money the country can borrow or from whom, but whether its institutions are capable of turning loans into productive investments rather than patronage networks. As the debt burden mounts, Kenya’s ability to prevent growing options for economic partnerships from undermining domestic accountability will determine whether its infrastructure boom becomes a foundation for long-term development or a monument to short-term political ambition.

Forget trilogues and treaty tweaks: the latest uproar shaking the European Parliament is about… carbonara

Die fehlende Gesamtstrategie beim Abbau von Bürokratie erschwert Unternehmen und Bürgern den Alltag und hemmt den Standort Deutschland.  Das Ziel der aktuellen Bundesregierung, die Bürokratiekosten um 25 Prozent bis zum Ende der Legislaturperiode 2029 zu senken, ist grundsätzlich zu begrüßen. Die ...

In today's edition: GDPR reboot, spectrum for 6G, DSA review, more Space Act lobbying

In today's edition: Food safety, novel foods, tuna

A Tanács felülvizsgált rendelet fogadott el, hogy átláthatóbbá tegye az európai politikai pártok és alapítványok finanszírozását.

Simplification: Council signs off the ‘stop-the-clock’ mechanism on requirements and procedures for chemical products.

The seventh meeting of the Accession Conference with Albania was held today in Brussels opening negotiations on cluster 5: Resources, agriculture and cohesion.

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.

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.

Szeretné bővíteni vállalkozását uniós támogatások segítségével és magánbefektetőket vonzani?

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.