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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS