When the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions were established nearly seven decades ago in the aftermath of World War II, economic and political power was concentrated in the hands of a few “victor” countries, making it relatively easy to reach a consensus on how to restore international order. However, since then, global governance has become increasingly muddled, impeding progress in areas of worldwide concern.
Not only do more than 190 countries now belong to the UN; publicly funded international institutions have proliferated, with not one multilateral institution having been shuttered since WWII. The result is an inefficient and confusing amalgam of overlapping mandates.
Meanwhile, significant portions of the international system lack sufficient funding to deliver meaningful progress in critical areas — a problem that will only worsen as the needs and expectations of an ever-expanding global population grow. In this context, progress on global issues like climate change, cybercrime, income inequality, and the chronic burden of disease are proving elusive.
The efforts of many publicly funded bodies have a real and lasting positive impact on the world. International institutions have spearheaded breakthroughs in a wide range of areas, including health, finance, economics, human rights and peacekeeping. However, such institutions are largely perceived as inaccessible, inefficient and opaque, leading national governments to neglect them. As their legitimacy and funding diminish, so does their effectiveness.
Overcoming 21st-century challenges will require a comprehensive review and renewal of international institutions. In its report titled Now for the Long Term, the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations — a group of experienced leaders and scholars convened to help formulate responses to global challenges — proposes mechanisms for undertaking this process.
For example, embedding sunset clauses in the governance structures of publicly funded international institutions would ensure regular reviews of organizational performance and purpose. Institutions that have fulfilled their mandate or proved unable to respond effectively to changing demands should be shuttered, and their resources redirected to more productive endeavors.
To escape that fate, existing institutions must adapt to shifting global power dynamics. This means increasing representation not only for the major emerging economies, such as China, India and Brazil, but also for countries like Nigeria and Indonesia, which together are home to more than 400 million people.
International affairs and international organizations largely operate under mid-20th-century arrangements, which has two serious shortcomings: First, countries with a diminishing stake retain disproportionate power. Second, global decisionmaking now involves four times as many countries as it did in the immediate postwar era, not to mention a plethora of nongovernmental organizations and civil-society groups, making for a messy — and often unproductive — process.
With the world’s problems becoming increasingly complex and interconnected, global decisionmaking processes must be as streamlined and efficient as possible. When numerous committees meet in parallel, the countries with the largest teams of experts dominate proceedings, effectively locking most countries out of key decisions and impeding meaningful dialogue.
To increase the productivity of global negotiations, the Oxford Martin Commission recommends creating coalitions of motivated countries, together with other actors, such as cities and businesses. As outcomes improve, international bodies’ legitimacy would be strengthened, which over time would enhance countries’ willingness to delegate powers to them.
Moreover, the commission proposes creating voluntary platforms to facilitate the creation of global treaties in vital areas. For example, a taxation and regulatory exchange would help countries to tackle tax avoidance and harmonize corporate taxation, while promoting information sharing and cooperation. Likewise, a cybersecurity, data-sharing platform could prove vital to understanding, preventing, and responding to cyberattacks.
As governments learn to collaborate with one another and with other actors, such as businesses and civil-society groups, faith in the power of international cooperation could be restored. In such an environment, breaking the gridlock on urgent global issues would be far easier than it has become in the current atmosphere of disillusionment and mistrust.
With interconnectedness comes interdependence. To protect the global commons, world leaders must pursue shared solutions as inclusively and efficiently as possible — a process that can be accomplished only through international institutions. Failure to do so could threaten the tremendous progress that globalization has facilitated in recent decades.
If governments, businesses, and civil society work together, the changes are feasible — promising a more sustainable, inclusive and prosperous future for all.
Pascal Lamy, former director-general of the WTO, is chairman of the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations. Ian Goldin is director of the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford and vice chairman of the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US