Victims of War must be loyal to deserve protection: International law and national legislation on enemy aliens 1907-1918

In international law the internment of civilians has only been regulated in writing in the context of the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949. Nevertheless this did not mean that civilians were not protected by at least some rules of customary international law before that date and especially in World War I. Furthermore specialists of international law expected states – at least those considered to be part of the community of civilized nations – to continue to treat all men equal before the law even in wartime. As research already conducted (Bird, Panayi, Fischer) has shown, this was not the case during World War I. Based on these findings the presentation proposed here wants to look into the development of international law and into some national preparations for treating so called “enemy aliens” in the period before 1914 (Austria-Hungary, Australia, United Kingdom), in order to see to what extent principles of international law protecting civilians from the consequences of war can be detected in the pre-war preparations. As far as can be judged so far the issue of loyalty was central in this context. Looking at the war itself, the presentation proposed here will try to look at how far the principles of international law alluded to above continued to influence the policies on “enemy aliens” in the countries mentioned and to see, how the International Committee of the Red Cross tried to use them to legitimize and expand its protective policies in regard to civilians interned in belligerent as well as neutral countries throughout the war.

Making research relevant to policy-makers, development actors, and local communities: NCCR North-South report on effectiveness of research for development

Bridging the gap between research and policy is of growing importance in international development. The National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South has rich experience in collaborating beyond academic boundaries to make their research relevant to various societal actors. This publication is the first to provide an overview of the effectiveness of NCCR North-South researchers’ efforts to interact with policy, practice, and local communities with a view to effecting a change in practices. A systematic assessment of researchers’ interactions with non-academic partners is presented, based on principles of monitoring and evaluation. On this basis, tools for collective learning and widespread adaptation are proposed. The report shows with what types of societal actors NCCR North-South researchers collaborate and analyses examples of how researchers conduct dialogue beyond academic boundaries, leading to specific outcomes. It also explains the frame conditions considered decisive for successful and sustainable policy dialogue and concludes with recommendations about how the NCCR North-South can increase the effectiveness of its research for development. The publication is a valuable source of inspiration for those interested in better understanding how to generate the multiple benefits of making science relevant to society.

Trade Law and Responsible Investment

There is broad international agreement that investment flows to the agricultural sector in developing countries need to be increased. In addition, there is broad agreement that such investments need to be responsible, and that they will only be responsible and beneficial to poor people if they contribute to the prudent development of the agricultural sector. Less studied is the link between responsible investment and trade. In this brief, the assumption is made that responsible investment flows presume a responsible trade regime, i.e. a trade regime that contributes to the prudent development of the agricultural sector in developing countries. Such a prudent, sustainable trade regime will promote investments in the agricultural sector that are responsible to the people involved and to the environment. It builds the “channel” through which investments flow. By contrast, an unsustainable trade framework will create an investment climate that promotes problematic investment practices.