The UN's Role in Global Governance (original) (raw)

GJ #2017, 2, Elements of a Theory of Global Governance, by David Held

After the devastation of World War II, a new international community was built, organized under the newly formed United Nations which oversaw the development of a new legal and institutional framework for the maintenance of peace and security. Maintaining global peace and stability served the purpose of limiting violence, but it was also a prerequisite for accelerating "globalisation". Even during the years of the Cold War, deep tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union facilitated, paradoxically, a deepening of interdependence and coordination among world powers. The logic of MAD ("mutually assured destruction") determined the awareness of the shared vulnerability of the globe. From the late 1940s to the beginning of the 21 st century, a densely complex and interdependent world order emerged. Global interdependence has now progressed to the point where it is beginning to undermine our ability to engage in further cooperation. The need for international cooperation has never been higher and yet effective institutionalized multilateral cooperation has stalled. It is possible to identify four reasons for this blockage, four pathways to gridlock: rising multipolarity, more difficult problems, institutional inertia and institutional fragmentation. Still, there exists a range of instances in which gridlock has not prevented effective global governance from emerging -some "pathways" out of gridlock. The following article discusses the reasons behind gridlock and the four pathways through and beyond it, in order to identify mechanisms through which effective global change can occur. This task, the search for pathways through and beyond gridlock, is a hugely significant one, if global governance is to be once again effective, responsive and fit for purpose.

The United Nations and Global Governance

Kyle Bisnath , 2021

While the United Nations is the only unifying organization that ‘brings together’ almost all the countries of the world, it is obsolete in the context of global governance, not only as a result of the Security Council’s structural prioritization of power and self-interest, but also because of the International Court of Justice’s lack of competency in conflict resolution and its political biases, as well as due to the General Assembly’s problem of voter manipulation.

Transnational Actors and International Reader's Guide

The subject of International Relations originally covered simply the relations between states, for example Britain's relations with India. Economic bodies and social groups, such as banks, industrial companies, students, environmentalists, and women's organisations, were given secondary status as non-state actors. This two-tier approach has been challenged, particularly by the effects of globalisation. First, ambiguities in the meaning given to 'a state', and its mismatch with the contemporary world, result in it not being a useful concept. Greater clarity is obtained by analysing intergovernmental and inter-society relations, with no presumption that one sector is more important than the other. Second, we can recognize governments are losing sovereignty when faced with the economic activities of transnational companies and the violent threat from criminals and guerrillas. Third, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) engage in such a web of global relations, including participation in diplomacy, that governments have lost their political independence. We conclude that events in any area of global policy-making have to be understood in terms of complex systems, containing governments, companies, and NGOs interacting in a variety of international organizations.

Global Governance: The Next Frontier. Egmont Paper, no. 2, April 2004

In the past two decades, globalisation has proven to be not just economic. It is also a political, a cultural and a security phenomenon. Our collective ability to handle all these challenges has not progressed at the same pace as globalisation itself. Today’s rules, instruments and institutions are often inadequate and ineffective to tackle the scale of our challenges, new and old together. Notwithstanding this, serious talk about global governance has been scarce. The very word is sometimes judged divisive. Moreover, after 9/11 world attention seemed to turn to the sole issue of the combat of the threat of terrorism. Global governance suddenly seemed out of sync with today’s anxieties. But neglecting global issues today, spells trouble for tomorrow. No future is inevitable. Ultimately, our kind of future depends on the kind of choices that we are making – or not making – today. The Royal Institute for International Relations set up an informal working group with the aim of drafting...

The Current State and Prospectives of Global Governance

2014

Global governance consists of a set of institutions, procedures and networks that jointly influence collective decision making (agreements, regulations, specific choices) necessary to tackle global challenges. The need to manage problems of global nature – to govern globally – is generated by globalization processes. Globalization gradually but irreversibly undermines the once-exclusive position of nation states, which (voluntarily or involuntarily) surrender a substantial part of their informal as well as formal decision-making authority to superior international or supranational structures. Regional political and economic organizations, but also non-governmental organizations, the mass media and supranational economic corporations are thus gaining more influence in the international arena. The study focuses on analyzing the position of individual actors in the global governance process. It reaches the conclusion that, despite being so numerous and diverse, the above-mentioned acto...