The Ukraine Support Tracker: Which countries help Ukraine and how?

This paper presents the "Ukraine Support Tracker", which lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war. This third version covers government commitments between January 24 and May 10, 2022. We now track support by 37 governments, including all G7 and European Union member countries, plus the support by EU institutions (thus including 38 donors). We also added a section estimating government cost of hosting Ukrainian refugees. Private donations and aid through non-governmental organizations are still not included due to a lack of systematic data. To value in-kind support like military equipment or weapons, we rely on government statements as well as own calculations using market prices. We find significant differences in the scale of support across countries, both in absolute terms and as percent of donor country GDP. In billions of Euros, by far the largest bilateral supporter of Ukraine is the United States, followed by Poland, the United Kingdom, and the EU institutions. In percent of donor GDP, Eastern European countries stand out as particularly generous, and this is even more so once we account for refugee costs

Genetic structure among populations of two gorgonian species inside and outside a Mediterranean Marine Protected Area

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are spatially delimited areas of the marine environment that are managed to conserve its biodiversity. Genetic connectivity and variability are two important parameters to take in account for proper design and manage MPAs. Gorgonians have an important ecological role contributing to provide biomass and complexity to the benthic habitats. Here, I evaluate the potential role of the MPA of Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo, Sardinia, in maintaining genetic diversity and connectivity among populations of two Mediterranean gorgonians: Eunicella singularis and Eunicella cavolinii. Specifically, I answered these questions: 1) Are there differences in genetic variability inside and outside the MPA? 2) What are the genetic connectivity patterns among populations inside and outside? 3) Are there differences in genetic variability and structure between the two species? 259 colonies of the two species were collected in 6 populations (2 sites outside and 4 sites inside the MPA) and genotyped using 9 microsatellite loci. The results showed that both species do not present significant genetic variability between populations sampled inside and outside the MPA. The genetic structure among populations was very low with higher FST values for E. singularis compared to E. cavolinii. E. cavolinii showed a slight significant pattern of isolation by distance. These results suggest that the genetic variability is maintained at the spatial scale of the MPA (at least for E. cavolinii) but that, in the future, will be useful to continue to monitor this variability. Finally, it is important to apply the same sample design in other MPAs to compare the pattern of connectivity and to evaluate the efficiency of the Mediterranean MPAs network. In fact, establishing a network of multiple small and interconnected reserves could increase the resilience of natural populations, including conserving genetic diversity and promoting larval connectivity

Internationale Hilfen für die Ukraine: Der "Ukraine Support Tracker" zeigt Kluft zwischen Zusagen und Umsetzung auf

Dieser Artikel fokussiert sich auf den Beitrag der Studie von Antezza et al. (2022) in der Erfassung humanitärer und finanzieller Hilfszusagen von über 40 Ländern im Kontext des russischen Angriffskrieges gegen die Ukraine. Wir diskutieren das Muster der Hilfszusagen im Ländervergleich und im Laufe der Zeit, ebenso wie die Differenzen zu den tatsächlich gelieferten Hilfen. Der Artikel ist somit als komplementär zu der überwiegend von militärischen Hilfszusagen geprägten öffentlichen Diskussion zu verstehen. Mit den folgenden Ausführungen demonstrieren wir, wie der "Ukraine Support Tracker" als systematische Datenquelle die Einordnung von entsprechenden bis dato ergriffenen Politikmaßnahmen erlaubt

Asymmetric effects of monetary policy in the euro area

Treball fi de màster de: Master's Degree in Economics and Finance: Economics Program. Curs 2022-2023Tutor: Mishel GhassibeWe study sign asymmetry in the effect of conventional monetary policy on key nominal and real macroeconomic variables in the euro area, using monthly data ranging from 2002 until 2022. We make use of local projections with state-dependence coming from the sign of the monetary policy shock, employing shocks identified using high frequency identification. Our baseline findings suggest that, while nominal macroeconomic variables are more sensitive to an expansionary monetary shock, contractionary monetary policy shocks have an immediate and stronger effect on real variables. Furthermore, we investigate the potential sources of asymmetry by clustering countries that present similarities in proxies of labor, financial and housing markets, respectively. We find results that are consistent with theoretical predictions that downward nominal wage rigidities, sectoral composition of the economy, firm sizes as well as the housing market and housing debt conditions all contribute to the sign asymmetries we uncover in our baseline results.Estudiamos la asimetría en el efecto de la política monetaria convencional en variables macroeconómicas clave nominales y reales en la zona euro, utilizando datos mensuales desde 2002 hasta 2022. Utilizamos proyecciones locales con dependencia estatal derivada del signo del choque de la política monetaria, empleando choques identificados mediante identificación de alta frecuencia. Nuestros hallazgos principales sugieren que, si bien las variables macroeconómicas nominales son más sensibles a un choque monetario expansivo, los choques de política monetaria contractiva tienen un efecto inmediato y más fuerte en las variables reales. Además, investigamos las posibles fuentes de asimetría mediante la agrupación de países que presentan similitudes en los indicadores de mercados laborales, financieros e inmobiliarios, respectivamente. Encontramos resultados consistentes con predicciones teóricas que indican que las rigideces salariales nominales a la baja, la composición sectorial de la economía, el tamaño de las empresas, así como las condiciones del mercado de la vivienda y la deuda hipotecaria, contribuyen a las asimetrías de signo que descubrimos en nuestros resultados principales

The Ukraine Support Tracker: Which countries help Ukraine and how?

This paper presents the 'Ukraine Support Tracker', which lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war. This sixth version covers government commitments made between January 24 and August 3, 2022 and has a new detailed overview on weapon deliveries. We track support by 40 governments, including all G7 and European Union member countries, plus by EU institutions (thus including 41 donors). Private donations and aid through non-governmental organizations are not included due to a lack of systematic data, but we do show estimates on government costs of hosting Ukrainian refugees. To value in-kind support like military equipment or foodstuff, we rely on government statements as well as own calculations using market prices. We find significant differences in the scale of support across countries, both in absolute terms and as percent of donor country GDP. In billions of Euros, by far the largest bilateral supporter of Ukraine is the United States, followed by the EU institutions and the United Kingdom. In percent of donor GDP, Eastern European countries stand out as particularly generous, and this is even more so once we account for refugee costs. In the past months (June and July), new commitments have fallen notably, thus further widening the gap between what Ukraine demands and the foreign aid it receives.This is version 5 of the paper based on the 6th release of the database (covering data since January 24 and through August 3, 2022).Paper Version 5 (August 18, 2022

The Ukraine Support Tracker: Which countries help Ukraine and how?

This paper presents the "Ukraine Support Tracker", which lists and quantifies military, financial and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in the context of Russia's war against Ukraine. We track government commitments to Ukraine made between January 24, 2022 and January 15, 2023 by 40 governments plus the EU institutions. We find significant differences in the scale of support across countries, both in absolute terms and as percent of donor country GDP. In billions of Euros, by far the largest single bilateral supporter of Ukraine is the United States, followed by the EU institutions, the United Kingdom, and Germany. In percent of donor GDP, Eastern European countries stand out as particularly generous and even more so once we account for refugee costs. In comparison to previous wars in history, the support for Ukraine is small, especially when considering the size of donor GDP. Annual US spending during the Korea, Vietnam and Iraq wars, for example, was much higher compared to spending on Ukraine 2022. Germany's support to liberate Kuwait during the Gulf War 1990/91 also far exceeds its help for Ukraine in 2022. Moreover, we find that Western countries clearly prioritized their own population in recent months. EU governments mobilized 10 times more funds for new domestic energy subsidies compared to what they mobilized for Ukraine. Thus, in the bigger picture, the international support for Ukraine so far has been rather limited.This is a considerably expanded version of the original paper and database (9th update). We are continuously improving this project and welcome feedback to [email protected]. We are greatly indebted to hundreds of readers around the world who have sent us helpful comments and suggestions. https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/February 202