Written by: Rada ROFEK, a 3rd year student in International Relations and Political Science at Paragon International University. Edited by: Heng Kimkong, a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at Cambodia Development Center and a PhD Candidate in Education at The University of Queensland, Australia. Photo Credit: Chinese Dragons — Symbolism, Types, Culture, Legends, Art from China's Highlights  When the world entered the post-cold war era after 1989, many scholars put in their intellectual efforts to explain the future patterns of international relations and global politics. Unlike Francis Fukuyama’s “The End of History and The Last Man” which emphasize political ideologies as the main unit of analysis, Samuel Huntington in his renowned book “The Clash of Civilizations” gives an explanation on the future shape of world politics based on the notion of civilization. In brief, the book states that people’s religious and cultural identities will be the primary source of conflicts among different groups in the world after the cold war. This is due to his belief that different languages, traditions, cultures, histories, and religions tear people apart. Specifically, Huntington argued that "Western" culture and “Islamic” culture are the two most encompassing civilizations. He stressed that clash of civilizations is unavoidable since these two worlds could cause global conflicts. As the Muslim world is unified for a greater Islamic civilization, Huntington accused Islamic extremists of posing the biggest threat to global peace and predicted that the Muslim world will have a conflict with the West as they are trying to challenge Western dominance and oppose universal Western ideals. Correspondingly, Huntington’s idea seems to be accurate due to some historical events, especially the 9/11 and the start of the Middle East conflict at the beginning of the 21st century. As a result, more and more people started to debate the possibilities of the clash between the Western and Islamic world. However, a more critical review is needed to understand the reality of contemporary global politics.  In practice, Huntington’s theory seems to be very controversial, prompting many scholars to debate and critique his theory. First and foremost, the Clash of Civilizations theory is believed to go against one of the dominant schools of thought in international relations theory, that is, realism—the belief that global politics is always a field of conflict among states seeking to pursue their national interests. However, Huntington dissented from the realist approach by basing his analysis on alliances rather than national interests. Secondly, another weak point is that Huntington’s theory is overgeneralizing because using civilizations as units of analysis to analyze global politics is too enormous. On this note, the term “Civilization” is also not clearly identified. To give an instance, would the rise of Muslims in Western countries be considered as Islamic or Western Civilization? In addition to this, followers of  Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are monotheists who aggregately see themselves as the descendants of Prophet Abraham. They are birthed on the same geographic area in the Middle East and have co-existed for thousands of years, but the point is what makes Huntington to contemplate them as no longer one single civilization. While repeatedly citing Islamic Civilization as the main source of future conflicts, he disregarded historical designs, principles, and laws that the West promulgated in the last century, especially after World War II. Thirdly, Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations theory which values cultural interests appears to not be coherent with the reality of today's contemporary world politics. In the first place, to analyze this extensive issue, the realist approach is still realistic as generally seen in today’s time. States do not really pursue cultural but mostly national interest, and nation-states are still the most vital actors in global affairs. Thus, it is more practical to predict that a clash of interests can be identified as the main source of conflict rather than the clash of civilizations stated by Huntington. On a more important note, in this post-cold war period, there is no doubt that economy is the dominant factor in shaping international relations. In fact, strong states are trying their best to maintain their status quos and hegemonic power, while weak states are striving to develop their economies to play a more important role in world politics. Therefore, Huntington’s theory appears to partially accord with the reality of the present world. Last but not least, stating that cultural and religious identities are a primary source of future conflicts shows a sign of overgeneralization and incomplete analysis which is not entirely applicable for the multifaceted nature of global politics in today's contemporary world. Conflicts could arise due to various factors such as competing national interest, territorial disputes, ethnic clashes, conflicting values and ideologies, and racial and religious contradictions. By defining a single factor or a combination of these factors to be the dominant source of conflict is not sufficient to explain the current global politics. Furthermore, future conflicts can also be possible as a result of states fighting one another for the interest of their own people for example, to ensure access to renewable sources such as water. To conclude, Huntington’s theory of Clash of Civilizations is not only limited but potentially dangerous as it creates a sense of otherness and opens the door for prejudice and a new enemy existing in our minds. Therefore, as the world is at the peak of the globalization era, more interactions are expected.  Thus, instead of being frightened by Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations theory, people everywhere — regardless of their differences in culture and religion — need to learn how to live and work together with tolerance and peaceful co-existence in this complex and multicivilizational world.

Written by: Virak Kanhapich, a 3rd year student majoring in Global Affairs at The American University of Phnom Penh Edited by: Sao Phal Niseiy, Editor-in-Chief at The Cambodianess and Deputy Editor-in-Chief at Thmey Thmey News (Photo Credit: Ministry of Post and Telecommunications website)   Many governments across the globe have been committed to building e-governance, and Cambodia is one of them. After Cambodia obtained an official membership in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1999, it has made tremendous efforts to use information technology and embarked on enormous administrative reform to ensure that it could make the goals reality. Although the government has made tremendous efforts, little is known to the public on how effective and efficient it can be in delivering public services since the term is still relatively new.  Before moving on to the substance, I would like to draw attention to the definition of e-governance and its background in Cambodia. As defined by Business Jargons, e-governance refers to the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) into all governmental processes to simplify and enhance the efficiency of public services in response to the needs of the people.  In the Cambodian context, the government also acknowledges the advantages of e-government, and the adoption of this concept began in early 2000 with the introduction of the National ICT Development Authority (NiDA) and the Government Administration Information System (GAIS) project, which includes the unveiling of applications such as the Electronic Approval System (EAS), real estate registration system, resident and vehicle registration. However, the programs seemed to fall short in meeting their full potential due to the lack of transparency and accountability.  According to an analysis by Dr. Leewood Phu, who is a tech adviser for the Cambodian government and NiDA Board Member, the administrative system was an obstacle because there are many complicated administrative processes in all sectors, be they the government offices, departments, and ministry level. Other factors such as missing documents or unreasonably withheld or delayed documents contributed to inefficient adoption of the concept. However, with the government keeping e-governance a top priority, the future looks more promising. Currently, more and more public services in Cambodia are getting in line with the digital transformation. Some ministries have been able to make use of digital technology to serve people. The Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport, in particular, has been able to effectively provide educational information and support its education policy implementation while receiving feedback from the public using social media platforms. On the other hand, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation has offered the ‘eVisa’ service, online information for visitors, consular services and information on doing business, making it more convenient for visitors and investors.  The Commerce Ministry also provides access to trade-related aspects online, including services, general information, trade, and investment information. Most importantly, as human interaction has been restrained during the COVID-19 pandemic, e-governance becomes even more critical in preventing the virus spread. As can be seen, the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications has unveiled the “Stop Covid” QR Code system, which records the locations of people who have been affected or potentially exposed to the virus. The application assists the authorities in carrying out contact tracing, enabling quarantine and treatment to be done effectively and instantly. Unquestionably, the adoption of e-governance is essential, but the complex nature of digital conversion can intimidate the aim to embrace technological integration into the governing system. But achieving it will bring much more notable benefits.   And with the introduction of e-governance, there can be more improvement in administrative efficiency and effectiveness because the system becomes more functional, sustainable and responsive, according to Mr Oum Chan Mono, a Senior Researcher at Cambodia Development Center.  It is worth taking Bangladesh as an example. Bangladeshi ministries have adopted the foundational work of the government flagship program known as a2i, which focuses on simplifying public services given to the people. With the scheme, the Digital Service Accelerator was introduced to assist the country’s version of the integrated ‘stack’ of digital identification, services and payment platform. That allows the South Asian country to save more than $8 billion over the last 10 years through an incredible reduction of the time, cost and number of visits required to access public services. It is noteworthy that electronic services could save up to 70 percent of transaction costs in traditional government settings, according to the Institution for Electronic Government.  Another success story that we should take into account is Estonia who achieved the successful implementation of e-government. In 2000, the same year when Cambodia began to manifest interest in e-governance, very few Estonians understood the benefits of the concept, and only a small number of one-third Estonians were using the internet or had digital literacy. But the country could manage to put in place the e-governance system to date. A study by Mr. Sun Kim, a lecturer for the faculty of Social Sciences and International Relations, indicates that owing to the Estonian government’s objective of digitalization, the country relied on well-educated academics in computer technology and assured strong cooperation between the private and public sectors. Two decades later, digital public services have become considerably present, with 99 percent of the services available online 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This greatly benefits the people. While other countries have suffered from failures in delivering public services to people during the pandemic, Estonia has managed to avoid public setbacks with its well-organized and easily accessible online governing system.  With the above mentioned examples, without considering the accessibility and digital skills, the use of digital technology in governing systems offers immense benefits. In contrast, those without proper digital skills or access to such technology can also be left out or marginalized. Cambodia, whose significant number of people lack proper digital skills, is not exempt from that challenge. Both at the national and local level, the use and the delivery of public services is a struggle as it requires sufficient knowledge of digital literacy, infrastructure and competent manpower for the services to converge.  And as more than 70 percent of Cambodians live in rural areas, access to online services becomes a leading challenge. Therefore, the public institutions need to simplify the policy agendas and implementation strategies to effectively and efficiently communicate with all levels, according to a public policy analyst, Mr. Chheang Vannarith. He added it is crucial to understand that e-governance is not simply an installation of computers nor a collection of information; thus, there are several barriers to a high level of e-government in Cambodia.  So, where are we now? In this age of digital transformation, private sectors and the youth have played a crucial role as they are the main driving force of changes and most adaptive to digital usage. But in Cambodia, the overall digital adoption among established private firms is still limited.  Moreover, the country still has insufficient human resources in digital technology, and there are also lacking areas in terms of accessibility to electricity or the usage of digital devices. Therefore, the implementation of the digital transformation in the governing system will definitely be bumpy and arduous.  And the public sector has just begun embarking on the push of digital transformation. But the ongoing pandemic has also boosted the process. As can be seen, the government has taken a further step to accelerate the digitalization of governance to maintain public safety through a switch from traditional paper systems to new digital ones.  And if scrutinized closely, the country also has really made some progress in both e-government development and e-participation. In terms of e-government development, Cambodia graduated from the middle E-Government Development Index (EGDI) group to the high EGDI group in 2020, according to the United Nations E-Government Knowledgebase for 2020. In the E- Participation Index (EPI), given that its score is still below global and regional averages, Cambodia could move up 42 positions. One of the prominent examples to prove this improvement is the widespread use of Facebook by numerous government institutions and agencies in delivering information to the people.  Moreover, I also notice that the rise of digital literacy among young people is on its way. And through additional support, it can quickly gain more momentum and become promising for the digital switch in the country in years to come.  So what should be done more to accelerate the process?  So far, it is quite encouraging that the government recognizes the importance of this transformation. Minister of Economy and Finance HE Aun Pornmoniroth has already acknowledged that the successful construction of digital governance in Cambodia will allow the government to be more robust, pliable and accountable. But I still believe that more tangible actions need to make this goal a reality. First and foremost, it requires the government to build up a greater political commitment, take a leading role in promoting active involvement and engagement among different stakeholders and undertake concrete actions in facilitating e-government innovation and planning.  Furthermore, to mitigate the challenges and meet the needs of the people when it comes to the present digital gap, existing policies should be evaluated and adjusted, and it entails a change to the education system to foster digital skills for youngsters. Not only young people, the government should also pay more attention to supporting senior citizens to help them acquire and improve digital knowledge through different programs or initiatives at local levels. If Cambodia could ensure a sustainable push for raising digital literacy among people and policy reforms, the path towards e-governance can be smooth.   Because the outcome generated from embracing digital governance will be greatly beneficial and rewarding for Cambodians in the long run, it is still worth the drive even though the roads are rocky for now.     *This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.  

Written by: Seak Por, 4th year student majoring in International Studies at The Royal University of Phnom Penh Edited by: Sao Phal Niseiy, Editor-in-Chief at The Cambodianess and Deputy Editor-in-Chief at Thmey Thmey News (Photo Credit: "Ermo" by Noel Feans is licensed under CC BY 2.0)   The Psychology of Climate Change: Why it is difficult to act collectively  The ‘boiling frog’ syndrome is possibly a good metaphor for how we have been dealing with climate change. When a threat is imminent, and destruction is right at the front of the door, resources and attention are pouring in from all directions. That is similar to the current battle against the COVID-19 pandemic. It is not to regard this as a bad phenomenon, but a reminder that we should also not overlook or ignore the current ‘slowing boiling’ climate change issue that is silently tormenting human races.  Climate change refers to the changes in the climate patterns of the earth, particularly those that occur more rapidly than the natural process. Climate changes from time to time over the century. However, the change we refer to is the rapid changes from the mid to late 20th century onwards, which contributed to the increasing temperature, making it a crisis that requires an urgent solution.  What science tells us about climate change   Scientists have long reached a consensus on the reality of climate change: 1) the earth is getting warmer; in fact, the earth surface temperature has already risen about 1.18 degrees Celsius on average; 2) the most extensive​ proportion is due to human activities with the releasing of the greenhouse emission by individuals and industries, the deforestation and other activities. While 1 or 2 degrees Celsius might seem minimal to you, this is the average number, and some regions are experiencing worse than others. The impact of climate change is far beyond just being ‘warmer’. It negatively impacts the whole ecosystems, biodiversity, food security, the resource and more. The evidence of the impacts of climate change has also already been noticeable, including the warming ocean, the shrinking ice sheets, the retreating glacier, the rising of sea level, declining arctic sea ice and other extreme phenomena. The scientists have warned of the irreversible impacts and the threshold for a dangerous average global increase in temperature of 1.5 degrees Celsius.  What has the world been doing?  In response to climate change, governments across the globe have adopted two main approaches: “mitigation” or reducing the flow of greenhouse emissions and “adaptation” or learning and adapting to live with climate change.  We all know that climate change is a global issue and requires a global effort. One of the most prominent global efforts is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted in 1992, and currently, it has 197 parties. Another one, a legally binding international convention within the UNFCCC, is the Paris Climate Agreement adopted in Paris in 2015 with 191 parties. The ultimate objective of UNFCCC is "to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the climate system."  On the other hand, the Paris Agreement aims to limit the collective greenhouse emission to well below 2 degrees Celsius and preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. Under the agreement, member states agree to cut down the emission based on their respective national plan known as the nationally determined contributions (NDC). The parties agreed to increase the level of their climate agreement by 2020, and the ambition will continue to be raised through a five-yearly cycle known as "global stocktake”, which works as a check-up mechanism for the agreement. The process will be starting in 2023. The state of net-zero emissions, which means the amount of greenhouse produced is equal to the amount withdrawn from the atmosphere, is expected to start between 2050 and 2100. What is the problem now? Even though global governments have made efforts to tackle climate change, the ultimate problem is we are running short of time while our current actions are not enough to reverse the trend.  The evidence is crystal clear. In 2018, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -- the intergovernmental body of the UN -- published a Special Report on 1.5°C, which asserted the hazardous impacts of global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. According to the World Economic Forum, research of the modeling of the projection of planet temperature has found that under the current rate, the earth would likely cross the threshold for dangerous warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius between 2027 and 2042.  But, regardless of the scientific warning, the attention and actions taken by the individual and government to deal with climate change appear to be inadequate.   So why is it so difficult for everyone to act? There can be various aspects and discussions of why it is so hard for everyone, including individuals and governments, to act fast and hard enough to deal with this crisis. But psychological explanations can provide another layer of explanation from the individual perception and attitude aspects.  Firstly, at the individual level, the bystander effect comes into play in people's perception towards taking action. The bystander effect explains the influence of the presence of others on the willingness of each person to act. People are less likely to help a person if other people are surrounding them than when he or she is alone. It is because individuals tend to believe the others are inclined to offer help. Similarly, in the case of climate change, even though most people do believe in climate change, people are less likely to act hard enough because of the tendency to let others do it. Additionally, people might have a sense of fulfillment and contribution for small acts they have done, such as purchasing a few eco-labeled products and stop short to do more because of the tendency to let others do the "big" works. Secondly, for many people, climate change and its effects seem much distant for most people. The construal level theory of psychological distance proposed that people consider events and places that are psychologically distant from them as more abstract than the things that are psychologically close to them. Generally, given that climate change impacts have been here, there are few major and direct disruptions that many can associate with. Therefore, this psychological distance of the climate crisis demotivates people from acting hard enough.  Thirdly, acting for climate change requires behavioral change that is in contrast to human psychology. Status quo bias explains people prefer things to remain as it is as change can be scary. When associated with the psychological distance mentioned above, without huge motivation, behavioral changes are less likely in the face of status quo bias. From mitigation to adaptation approaches to climate change and from individual levels to firms, acting hard to tackle this problem requires both the changing in behavior and resources contributed to the change.  Additionally, acting to address climate change offers a long-term benefit, but it compromises the short-term benefits. For example, to act more responsibly, people need to sacrifice comfort in their present-day activities, including the use of fossil fuel. The temporal discounting concept explains the individual tendency to discount the rewards or benefits in the future and overvalue the current rewards or benefits.  This can be seen more often in governance and policy implementation. Given the short time in office under a democratic system, many governments have less incentive to act on climate change as the interventions can only yield results in the long run. It is far different from focusing on economic development or other works as these can provide more visible results quickly.  Lastly, at the international level, the well-known collective action problem can shed light on the lack of a strong willingness to tackle climate change. This crisis is a collective action problem in which all actors would be better off cooperating, but there has been the tendency to free-ride due as well as the conflicts of interests among states. Some regions are hit harder than others, and developing countries are the most vulnerable. Developed countries, while being least affected, have incentives to take further actions. In contrast, the developing countries with fewer resources are compelled to act more, compromising their economic interests. Like any collective action problem, climate change needs strong central actors to regulate.  So, what next?  All reasons I raised earlier provide some insights on one of the aspects to consider when planning or addressing climate change. Psychological aspects shape the behavior of every individual ranging from the leader of a country to the general public.  As we are working together to address climate change, it entails a behavioral change. One of the initiatives is promoting psychological understanding -- the human reward system and nature -- to encourage people to reduce their carbon footprint.  To ensure effective climate communication, the deployment of both methods: the top-down approach (scientists to the public) and the button-up approach (public to the government) is the most effective way to alter the public perception. We need to recognize that addressing climate change is not just the responsibility of the government but also every individual. By understanding these aspects, each of us will be capable of reevaluating our perceptions and responses to act more responsibly. Youths, meanwhile, continue to play a vital role in highlighting the impact and altering the perception of the decision makers.    *This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.  

Written by: Yin Verak, a 3rd year student majoring in Business Administration at Paññāsāstra University of Cambodia Edited by: Sao Phal Niseiy, Editor-in-Chief at The Cambodianess and Deputy Editor-in-Chief at Thmey Thmey News (Photo Credit: "Researchers in a rice field in Cambodia" by IFPRI is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)   The world has begun to recognize the need to keep business profitable while minimizing the negative environmental impacts. Therefore, the concept of sustainable business becomes more and more significant for many countries across the world, including developing countries. Cambodia, in particular, has some businesses that try to embrace the sustainability concept. The actions include management of waste as well as promotion of clean and green initiatives and eco-friendly businesses.    These can be a part of innovative solutions to help and reduce environmental problems in Cambodia, enabling us to repair the environmental damages resulting from our poor environmental performance. According to the Environmental Performance Index (EPI) in 2020, Cambodia was ranked 139 out of 180 countries, with a score of 33.6.      Global warming has been growing as one of the most scorching topics for global leaders to discuss and seek practical solutions as many countries have already been struggling to deal with the adverse effects of this disastrous problem. The level of global temperature has been increasing noticeably, resulting in the rapid melting of glaciers. Meanwhile, the weather has also become more extreme and less predictable than it used to be many decades ago. We have to recognize that our planet earth has suffered severe damages, and our environment has undergone harmful pollution. These can produce more natural disasters, the collapse of ecosystems, gradual environmental degradation, undermining the welfare of current and younger generations.  But all of these concerns have been predominantly driven by human activities -- one of which is business. Generally, the business sector has been one of the largest sources of pollution. Many industries and companies overuse hazardous chemicals and mismanage these savage elements, leading to the release of millions of tons of toxic gas and liquid into the atmosphere and oceans.  Plastic pollution, needless to say, is also produced by business activities because plastics are more affordable, versatile, and durable. However, plastic becomes a global problem because the excessive amount of plastic waste ends up in waterways and oceans. On the other hand, several business owners only focus on their profits and how much money they can make rather than pay attention to the virulent damages they pose to the environment, the public and the world. In the meantime, not many of them are held accountable for their environmental and social destruction. That’s why it becomes increasingly critical that more businesses can manage to embrace the sustainability concept to help solve global environmental problems. In business, sustainability refers to doing business without negatively impacting the environment, society and community. Clean and renewable energy, for instance, is one of the most sustainable practices in the energy sector, which could lead to lower carbon emissions and reduce the impact on the environment. Likewise, eco-businesses such as fiber-based packaging, recyclable products, eco-friendly products, organic catering, green industry and so on can be superseding single-use plastics, eventually. Hence, as a developing country, Cambodia should take further steps to promote these sustainable and innovative solutions.  Why is sustainable business beneficial for Cambodia?  Fostering sustainable business practices will significantly contribute to the inclusive development of society in many ways. Here I raise three vital benefits Cambodia can gain if it can manage to put forward this concept on a broader scale.   Firstly, sustainable business is beneficial for the environment. Cambodia is one of the most vulnerable countries to natural disasters and climate change, and it has seen rising plastic pollution due to its rapid development. In Phnom Penh alone, around 10 million plastic bags are used daily, and people are more comfortable using them with no guilt. Hence, introducing sustainable solutions is necessary to address environmental concerns. Furthermore, sustainable business is the best choice to reduce reliance on natural resources, minimize avoidable waste and its terrible impacts on the environment. I believe it will help us restore our natural ecosystem, making our country clean and eco-friendly for all of us to live.  Secondly, sustainable business can enhance social welfare and foster a cohesive society. The top priority of sustainable business is to create positive impacts on society and the environment. Besides, it involves seeking solutions that aim to promote more green spaces and reduce pollution--all of which are efforts to safeguard public health. Sweden can be the best example as sustainable business practices have been widespread in the country. By doing so, Sweden manages to achieve many things such as environmental sustainability, gender equality, anti-corruption, and sustainable social innovation. Plus, Sweden has been ranked 1st out of 150 countries as a sustainable country based on the environmental, social and governance (ESG) indicators. Last but not least, this innovation can pave the way for more sustainable employment, more sustainable resource consumption and robust economic growth. Besides, pursuing sustainability can also contribute to the further improvement of environmental and technological innovation and boosting business productivity and competitiveness.   All in all, sustainable business ideas are one of the key drivers of environmental recovery, sustainable economic development and advancement of social welfare of people across the world. However, as a developing country, Cambodia still faces many challenges when it comes to cherishing these concepts. Those challenges include financial constraints, lack of public awareness and limited participation of the public and relevant stakeholders. Although there are many difficulties, it doesn’t mean Cambodia can’t effectuate the concepts and accomplish them. To realize the goals, as a business undergraduate student, I think that it requires that we take more actions and work collectively. Even though the private sectors are the leading force in championing sustainability concepts, the government and civil society groups also have a responsibility to offer more support and cooperate. It is because the nexus of these three is how they will accomplish much greater success for constructing our sustainable society altogether. Moreover, business owners and consumers also need to keep the environment in mind, and they have to inspire the habit of sustainability among the public while seeking to minimize the harmfulness derived from their business operation because all human beings live interdependently.    “Making a difference by starting with sustainable innovative ideas.”    *This blog is produced with the financial support from the European Union and The Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency through Transparency International Cambodia and ActionAid Cambodia. Its contents do not reflect the views of any donors.