Browse by: "M"
Index
Title Index
Year Index
In an effort to reach a wider audience, and keep the information regarding the status of multilateral agreements more up-to-date, this content is now available online at: www.oecd-nea.org/law/multilateral-agreements.
In an effort to reach a wider audience, and keep the information regarding the status of multilateral agreements more up-to-date, this content has been moved online and is available at: www.oecd-nea.org/law/multilateral-agreements.
In an effort to reach a wider audience and keep the information regarding the status of multilateral agreements more up-to-date, this content has been moved online and is available at: www.oecd-nea.org/law/multilateral-agreements.
The OECD Workshop on Multilateral Environmental Agreements and Private Investment, organised in co-operation with the Finnish Ministry for the Environment, took place in Helsinki on 16-17 June 2005. It provided an opportunity to bring relevant stakeholders together to exchange views and discuss recent experiences regarding private investment that contributes to the solution of global environmental problems.
This report has two parts: the key messages emerging from the workshop (Part I) and a summary of the presentations and discussions (Part II). It builds upon presentations by, and discussions among, workshop participants who represented national governments, MEA Secretariats and implementing agencies, businesses, international governmental and non-governmental organisations, research institutes and other stakeholder groups.
For background information, please see "Multilateral Environmental Agreements and Private Investment: Business Contribution to Addressing Global Environmental Problems", published as Document No. 387 in OECD Papers, Vol. 5, Issue 2.
Environmental and investment policies have the potential to reinforce their respective goals while promoting the broader objective of sustainable development. Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) aim at changing the collective behaviour of governments, private investors, and other stakeholders in order to achieve certain environmental goals. They are also an important part of the international context in which investment takes place. Therefore, MEAs promoting investment objectives and investment activity in support of MEA implementation play an important role in making investment and environment policies compatible.
The successful implementation of MEAs cannot be achieved by public efforts alone, but also relies on private sector contribution. Therefore, MEAs need to be designed in a way that promotes private sector involvement. Environmentally-friendly investments represent an opportunity for environmental policies and the private sector: while contributing to the goals of MEAs they may lead to enhanced economic returns. The report aims at deepening the understanding of this potential. It examines the main areas of inter-linkage between MEAs and private investment activity focusing on the three Rio Conventions and the Montreal Protocol.
Further reading: "Multilateral Environmental Agreements and Private Investment: Workshop Proceedings and Key Messages" published as Document No. 406 in OECD Papers, Vol. 5, Issue 9.
On 4 April 2005, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. This instrument results from the work accomplished by the Ad Hoc Committee established by General Assembly Resolution 51/210 of 17 December 1996 and the Working Group of the Sixth Committee.
This paper sets out to analyse the need for better “transparency tools” which inform university stakeholders about the quality of universities. First, we give an overview of what we understand by the concept of transparency tools and those that are currently available. We then critique current transparency tools’ methodologies, looking in detail at the question of data sources, the risks involved in constructing league tables and the challenges in using composite indicators. Lastly, we argue in favour of developing a new principle for transparency tools: that of multidimensional ranking.
This analysis of the 2020 OECD multidimensional fragility framework is a background paper for States of Fragility 2020. It provides a snapshot of the state of fragility in the world today, paying particular attention to the 57 fragile contexts on the framework. The paper starts by unpacking the heterogeneity among fragile contexts. It then reviews the layers, trajectories and clusters of fragility. Thinking in systems, and the states of fragility within systems, provides a conceptual foundation to interpret this analysis and guide targeted and differentiated approaches to engagement in fragile contexts. Focusing international policy attention on these fragile contexts is important to ensure sustainable development progress that leaves no one behind.
Ample research has shown the importance of collaboration between practitioners, researchers, and policy makers to ensure holistic, inclusive, and effective policy making, particularly in the field of refugee education. Many countries, however, still face challenges in engaging with stakeholders during all the stages of the practice – research – policy transfer in the context of refugee education in a meaningful and effective way. The unique and distinct needs of refugee students in education systems require extensive collaboration among schools, service providers, and (refugee) communities to collect evidence whether and how refugee students’ needs are met. Hence, a multi-stakeholder approach or “whole-of-a-society” approach is one of the prerequisites for designing inclusive refugee education policies. This paper highlights the importance of stakeholder engagement at all stages of the practice – research – policy transfer, and maps key stakeholders in refugee education in Europe.
This paper describes MOLES 1.0, an integrated land-use and transport model developed with Object-Oriented Programming principles in order to combine selected characteristics from Spatial Computable General Equilibrium and microsimulation models.
Comprehensive and coordinated action across levels of government responsible for different policy domains (labour, education, housing and welfare/health) as well as across local actors is crucial to migrant integration. To respond to this need for co-ordination, different policy instruments are mobilised by countries. This paper presents six of them, to illustrate three categories of practices supporting migrant integration through better multi-level co-ordination:
Reinforcing co-ordination (financial, human, technical) between levels of governments and private actors such as businesses or non-governmental organisations to foster migrant integration and retention: The Canadian Atlantic Immigration Pilot (AIP) and the French Territorial Contracts for the Reception and Integration of Refugees (CTAIR);
Resolving information and evaluation asymmetries: Vienna (Austria) Integration and Diversity Monitor and the German Network IQ;
Illustrating the positive externalities of territorial development and investment programmes on migrant integration and social cohesion: The Italian Inner Areas Strategy and the French Urban Policy.
Subnational governments in Asia and the Pacific are key providers of the public services and infrastructure required to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Given this role, it is essential that policymakers and development partners understand and support the effective functioning of multi-level governance structures and subnational government finances across the region.
This joint OECD-ADB report provides a comprehensive overview of subnational governments across Asia and the Pacific. It covers over 467,000 subnational governments from 26 countries, which represent 53% of the world’s population and 40% of global GDP. On average in 2020, subnational governments in the region accounted for 29% of total public expenditure (8.8% of GDP), 35% of total public revenue (8.5% of GDP) and 38% of public investment (2% of GDP).
Harnessing unique data from the 3rd edition of the OECD-UCLG World Observatory on Subnational Government Finance and Investment, the analysis highlights how decentralisation and territorial reforms have reconfigured the structures and finances of subnational governments in the region. It covers a range of topics including fiscal rules, financial management capacity, priority-based budgeting, asset management and the use of public-private partnerships.
European Union Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR) represents a long-term strategic policy framework to promote socio-economic growth and tighter relations between European Union member countries and countries in the Western Balkan region. Of the four European Union Strategies in place, EUSAIR is potentially the most challenging, with significant degrees of diversity among the four EU and four non-EU member partner countries. This is often revealed by their differences in administrative capacity, governance and economic development. National multi-level governance structures supporting EUSAIR contribute to the Strategy’s national-level implementation. Enhancing the national multi-level governance practices applied to EUSAIR by participating countries could further build the Strategy’s ability to contribute to national and macro-regional growth, development and environmental sustainability. This paper explores how questions of ownership, funding, strategic synergies, institutional coordination mechanisms, resource capacities and constraints, and stakeholder engagement affect EUSAIR implementation, and offers a series of recommendations for action.