TNI Fellows are internationalist intellectuals with a track record of progressive activist-scholarship and a passionate commitment to social change. They bring TNI vision and new ideas, expertise relevant to current programme, connect TNI to relevant networks and commit themselves to an active role in TNI. TNI Fellowships do not involve any financial remuneration.
On 17 December 2010, Mohammed Bouazizi, a 26-year-old Tunisian man set himself on fire in protest at a police beating after he resisted attempts to confiscate the cart that he used to sell vegetables and fruit. His desperate action prompted a wave of protests - first in Tunisia and then across the whole of the Middle East - as public anger at pervasive corruption, police brutality, unemployment, neoliberal economic policies, rising inequality and persistent human rights abuses exploded to the fore.
This section explores the underlying causes of the uprisings, debates the military intervention in Libya, examines the ongoing constraints on democratic movements, and looks to highlight the implications of changes in the Middle East for Western powers and their main ally, Israel who have supported autocratic dictatorships to facilitate ready access to oil, support the 'War on Terror' and act as a repressive buffer for migration into Europe.
The BRICS Initiative for Critical Agrarian Studies (BICAS) is a collective of largely BRICS-based or connected academic researchers concerned with understanding the BRICS countries and their implications for global agrarian transformations. Critical theoretical and empirical questions about the origins, character and significance of complex changes underway need to be investigated more systematically.
TNI is advocating Public Public Partnerships (PUP) as an alternative policy to privatisation or to Public-Private Partnerships in water services as well as a concrete tool to work with partners to reform public water companies/utilities, improve services and realise the right to water on the ground. A public-public partnership (PUP) is simply collaboration between two or more public authorities or organizations, based on solidarity, to improve the capacity and effectiveness of one partner in providing public water or sanitation services. They have been described as a “peer relationship forged around common values and objectives, which exclude profit-seeking”. PUPs avoid the risks which are typically encountered in public-private partnerships: transaction costs, contract failure, renegotiation, the complexities of regulation, commercial opportunism, monopoly pricing, commercial secrecy, currency risk, and lack of public legitimacy. In general the objectives of PUPs are to improve the capacity of the assisted partner. In practice, PUPs' work can be divided into five broad categories: training and developing human resources, technical support on a wide range of issues, improving efficiency and building institutional capacity, financing water services, improving participation. Public Community Partnerships Public-communitarian partnerships (PCPs) are internationally referred to as public-public partnerships but PCPs has a stronger connotation of community. While government and public water authorities should adopt and implement a water delivery policy that prioritises serving the needs of rural communities, many state-owned utilities fail to serve hard-to-reach areas. Community-based water systems are bridging the gap in water service delivery in many parts of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. TNI has observed new forms of partnerships between public authorities and rural communities, in which the communities are engaged in the decision-making about water solutions, supported with public funding and expertise and are empowered to take responsibility for running water systems. Such partnerships can bring rapid and lasting improvements.
A more refined distinction is required to define appropriate drug control measures according to the specific characteristics of drug substances, their health risks, the dynamics of their markets and their user groups. The existing classification schedules for drugs from the UN 1961 and 1971 Conventions do not provide sufficient differentiation. The consideration of such diverse substances as coca, cocaine, cannabis, opium and heroin in the same schedule, hampers effective policy responses that can properly take into account the different properties of drugs and the reasons people use them.