Sharing Global Governance: The Role of Civil Society Organizations

This report explores the multiple roles and potential of CSOs in international policymaking and examines the strengths and weaknesses of CSOs and state-based organizations in global governance. It looks particularly closely at the resources, access, skills and experience that each group of actors brings to the table. It concludes that the infrastructure used to incorporate CSOs into the United Nations and other multilaterals must be strengthened and expanded if more integrated and effective forms of collaboration are to be developed and outlines policy recommendations how this goal can be accomplished

Collaborative Governance: A Guide for Grantmakers

Provides a framework for understanding the different tools and approaches within the emerging field of collaborative governance. Includes case examples that illustrate how the process works, and how it can be applied in specific situations

Freshwater security, conflict and cooperation: the case of the Red Sea-Dead Sea conduit project

This study examines the challenge of freshwater security faced by Israel, Jordan and Palestine, and mechanisms for multilateral collaboration that have been developed in order to create a Red Sea-Dead Sea Conduit. This paper outlines the proposed conduit as a major collaborative project which hinges on the engagement of both state and non-state stakeholders. The argument presented here is that the feasibility and planning process has so far been successful and that the mechanisms for collaboration developed as part of this project are the reason why. Overall conclusions suggest that the importance of freshwater security and the agency of international state and non-state actors are largely responsible for these collaborative successes

The EU as a global-regional actor in security and peace: the EU-GRASP final integrative report

This report is a final product of a research project, called EU-GRASP that aimed at a better understanding of the EU’s role in regional and global peace and security issues. Undertaking this was a fascinating and challenging task, especially as the subject matter was, for various reasons, a real moving target

Expanding alliance: ANZUS cooperation and Asia–Pacific security

Is an alliance conceived as a bulwark against a resurgence of Japanese militarism and which cut its military and intelligence teeth in the Cold War is still relevant to today’s strategic concerns? Overview The alliance between Australia and the US, underpinned by the formal ANZUS Treaty of 1951, continues to be a central part of Australian defence and security thinking and an instrument of American policy in the Asia–Pacific. How is it that an alliance conceived as a bulwark against a resurgence of Japanese militarism and which cut its military and intelligence teeth in the Cold War is still relevant to today’s strategic concerns? The answer is partly—and importantly—that the core values of the ANZUS members are strongly aligned, and successive Australian governments and American presidential administrations have seen great value in working with like-minded partners to ensure Asia–Pacific security. Far from becoming a historical curiosity, today it’s not just relevant, but of greater importance than has been the case in the past few decades. To explore new ideas on how to strengthen the US–Australia alliance, ASPI conducted a high-level strategic dialogue in Honolulu in July this year. Discussions canvassed the future strategic environment; the forthcoming Australian Defence White Paper; budget, sovereignty and expectation risks; and cooperation in the maritime, land, air, cyber, space and intelligence domains. A key purpose of the Honolulu dialogue was to help ASPI develop policy recommendations on the alliance relationship for government. This report is the product of those discussions

Enacting Productive Dialogue: Addressing the Challenge that Non-Human Cognition Poses to Collaborations Between Enactivism and Heideggerian Phenomenology

This chapter uses one particular proposal for interdisciplinary collaboration – in this case, between early Heideggerian phenomenology and enactivist cognitive science – as an example of how such partnerships may confront and negotiate tensions between the perspectives they bring together. The discussion begins by summarising some of the intersections that render Heideggerian and enactivist thought promising interlocutors for each other. It then moves on to explore how Heideggerian enactivism could respond to the challenge of reconciling the significant differences in the ways that each discourse seeks to apply the structures it claims to uncover