Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Geneve, Switzerland

The Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies is a postgraduate university located in Geneva, Switzerland. In academic and professional circles, the Graduate Institute is considered one of Europe's most prestigious institutions. The Institute's alumni and current/former faculty include ambassadors, foreign ministers, heads of state, former Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan, seven Nobel prize recipients, and one Pulitzer Prize winner. It specializes in the fields of political science, international relations, international law, international economics, international history, anthropology and development studies.The school has a diverse student body and cosmopolitan character due to its 80 percent intake of international students, of over 100 nationalities. It is located blocks from the United Nations headquarters in Europe, the World Trade Organization, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and the World Health Organization.It is a full member of the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs, a group of the world's top schools in international affairs, and accredited by the Swiss government as an independent academic institution.The Graduate Institute is continental Europe's oldest school of international relations and was the first university dedicated solely to the study of international affairs. It offered one of the first doctoral programs in international relations in the world. In 2008, the Graduate Institute of International Studies absorbed the Graduate Institute of Development Studies, a smaller post-graduate institution also based in Geneva. The merger resulted in the current Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies.In 2013, the school inaugurated its new campus, the Maison de la paix. Wikipedia.


Kickbusch I.,Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
Public Health Reviews | Year: 2013

Health will continue to gather strength as a global public domain if it links itself strategically with other transnational agendas and strengthens its political ability to produce global public goods for health. Three new political spaces offer opportunities to take the global health agenda a significant step forward: the emerging new development paradigm, the post-2015 debates at the United Nations and the dynamics created through the increasing trans-border health challenges the World Health Organization (WHO) must deal with under conditions of globalization. Presently there are concerns whether the major initiatives that have boosted global health in the last 20 years will continue to grow and attract sufficient funding. But the more pertinent question is whether they are still suited to address the major concerns global health faces between now and 2030. In addition many of the global health challenges can only be addressed through actions in sectors other than health and by facing the inherently political nature of health as well as strong opposition from parts of the private sector. A well-financed and rules based governance system - adapted to complex multilateralism - is needed to manage, complement and integrate the many issue-based initiatives. The next era of global health will be judged by its political capacity to ensure global health security, build universal health coverage, address the commercial determinants of non-communicable diseases and reduce global health inequalities. This will require a focus on producing global public goods for health (GPGH) through strong international organizations, in particular the WHO, supported by governments who have the political will and the institutional capacity to practice smart sovereignty, reach beyond the heath sector and engage with non-state actors. Source


Koser K.,Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
Global Governance | Year: 2010

This article serves as the introduction for this special issue of Global Governance on international migration. It presents some of the key facts, figures, concepts, and debates on international migration that appear in the articles that follow, and outlines their main arguments. Five arguments in support of greater international cooperation and more formal processes of global governance on international migration are presented here. First, contemporary international migration is now occurring at unprecedented levels and has a truly global reach. Second, international migration can no longer effectively be managed or controlled by national migration policies, and greater international cooperation is required to achieve national goals in international migration. Third, there are growing numbers of migrants around the world who are vulnerable and exploited, and insufficiently protected by either states or international institutions. Fourth, emerging structural features in the global economy, alongside the effects of climate change, are likely to significantly increase the scale of international migration worldwide, and present new management and protection challenges. Finally, momentum for change is slowly developing. Source


Sahakian M.D.,Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
Energy Policy | Year: 2011

This paper addresses the topic of energy and development through a multi-disciplinary and systemic approach that combines environmental considerations with a social understanding of consumption. The focus is on electricity usage in the home and specifically lighting and cooling. Set in the urban mega-polis of Metro Manila, the Philippines, energy consumption is first placed in its biophysical perspective: the energy sources and electricity grid are presented, in relation to the Philippines as well as the region. The research findings then explore the social and cultural drivers behind household electricity consumption, revealing in several examples the strong influence of globalization-understood here as the flow of people, remittances, images and ideas. Policy recommendations are provided, based on the research results, with concluding remarks relevant to other similar contexts. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Source


van Griethuysen P.,Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
Journal of Cleaner Production | Year: 2010

By questioning the origins of the inertia facing the degrowth movement, this contribution identifies property as the constitutive institution of capitalism, and property expansion as the dominant socioeconomic process leading world societies to economic path dependence, techno-institutional lock-in and eco-social impasse. Demonstrating why and how property-based economic rationality subordinates ecological and social considerations to capitalist requirements, this paper stresses both the need for an inversion in the hierarchy of social norms and the systemic opposition to such an inversion, which emanates from the capitalist/industrial expansion. The text also brings to light some disregarded processes underlying the current economic crisis, by pointing out the institutional and technological locked-in situation into which the western development path has led our societies. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source


Andonova L.B.,Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
Global Environmental Politics | Year: 2010

The article examines the politics and patterns of public-private partnerships for the environment in the multilateral system. It argues that two kinds of dynamics have contributed to the hybridization of environmental authority at the global level. On one hand, the fragmentation of environmental regimes and the parallel growth of non-state actors have resulted in structural pressures and opportunities for public-private collaboration. More significantly, however, international organizations have responded to the pluralization of global environmental politics selectively and acted as entrepreneurs of collaborative governance. The analysis uses a principal-agent perspective of international organizations to specify the conditions for organizational entrepreneurship of public-private partnerships. The theoretical propositions inform the comparative analysis of three "meta" partnership programs in the multilateral system: the Small Grants Program, the Prototype Carbon Fund, and the environmental portfolio of the United Nations Fund for International Partnerships. The study demonstrates that public-private partnerships represent neither a radical "powershift" from established institutions, nor are partnerships a marginal governance fad. The three partnership programs examined here emerged out of the mandates and expertise of their lead organizations and partners, but established and diffused new niches of environmental governance, particularly around community-based biodiversity management and climate-change related technology diffusion. © 2010 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Source

Discover hidden collaborations