Thought and Action

Accelerated Global Action – the gateway reform to a better world

The Corvid19 pandemic showed why we need effective global action. The World Health Organisation created the Global Vaccine Initiative (GVI), an alliance of public and private sector organisations to protect health. It is co-leading COVAX, a global risk-sharing mechanism for the equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. Access to Covid vaccines is still highly unequal, increasing the risk of pandemics, but the alliance dramatically accelerated the production and distribution of life-saving vaccines.

Viruses are only one of many risks needing urgent global action. Runaway climate change, the collapse of biodiversity, pollution, nuclear warfare, and risks from artificial intelligence could tip humanity into an existential crisis. Unsustainable consumption, population growth, conflict, trade wars and the fragmentation of global governance could trigger a catastrophic chain reaction many times worse than Corvid19. The first world war and 2008 banking crisis showed how quickly events can spiral out of control. The War in Ukraine, tensions over Taiwan and conflicts in Africa or Middle East all have potential to erupt.

When nations help each other across ideological and political boundaries, humanity can overcome crises. Together we eliminated smallpox and rinderpest, and the alliance is tackling polio, AIDS, malaria and other diseases. The Law of the Sea, control of mines and action on the ozone layer are just a few examples where international cooperation is making a positive difference.

Getting global agreement to tackle problems is a slow process, easily undermined by a few powerful states and the painfully slow process of achieving consensus in international negotiations.

Corvid19 is a clear, identifiable danger, but action on many problems is blocked by powerful vested interests who make concerted global action immensely difficult.

Fortunately, we don’t need to wait for complete agreement to make progress. The best way to improve global governance is to improve the way progress has been made in the past, which is through coalitions of the willing. The West’s unilateral military action against Iraq in 2003 gave coalitions of the willing a bad name. The lesson from this is that the international community needs a framework of principles for coalitions of the willing, not that they should be shunned. The people and nations of the world should be able to take Accelerate Global Action to make rapid progress on critical issues, within agreed guidelines in international law.

Learning from the past

Our governments have learnt from past catastrophes. Since World War II, humanity has dramatically improved political systems and technology to make most peoples’ lives safer, longer and often happier.

World population has grown by over a fifth since 2000, more than 1.4 billion people, without serious incident. Almost a billion people have been lifted out of absolute poverty. Most contagious diseases are contained. Average global life expectancy is up, from 60 in 1960 to 72 years. Peaceful travel and trade have increased dramatically. The Iraq war was a disastrous mistake and too many people suffer from conflict, but fewer people are killed in war. The 2007/8 financial crash was more severe than in 1929, but lessons from the past enabled global leaders to manage it better, although mistakes were made and many still suffer as a result.

Global governance is fragmented and fragile

Our current system of global governance is highly sophisticated, involving more than seven thousand international agencies¹. Global government is not centralised or controlled by a single executive but scattered between thousands of bodies accountable to myriad government departments, businesses and civil society groups. Our system of global governance is complicated, uncoordinated and expensive. It struggles to cope with countless challenges and potentially catastrophic risks^{2, 3, 4, 5}. We cannot afford to wait for everyone to agree to bring about urgent reforms.

Sensible world leaders know about the problems but, as Jean Claude Junker said about economic reform in 2007, “We all know what to do, we just don’t know how to get re-elected after we’ve done it”.

There is no shortage of ideas about how to run the world better, but little prospect that they will be adopted, except perhaps after another major catastrophe. In 2016 the Global Challenges Foundation (GCF) launched a Global Governance Prize for “a governance model able to effectively address the most pressing threats and risks to humanity.” It attracted 2,702 entries from 122 countries, drew up a long list of 14 and awarded $600,000 to each of the three winners. They join a growing library of reform proposals, including the Oxford Martin Commission for Future Generations, the   Independent Commission on Multilateralism, The Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, the 1995 Commission on Global Governance on Our Global Neighbourhood, and many, many more. The Sustainable Development Goals are a focus for concerted action to solve global action.

But however good these initiatives are, they struggle to get agreement from all governments, let alone action. The tensions between national sovereignty and global governance makes it difficult for governments to commit time and money to large scale reforms. Powerful countries which benefit from the current system want to keep their privileges, while many countries which suffer don’t have the power to act.

Triggers for global action

Governments tend to act on global issues in three main circumstances:

1. After a major global crisis, such as World War 2, when the UN was created;
2. When countries see their interests threatened and mobilise an international coalition to take concerted action, as after the OPEC oil price hikes of the 1970s, the 9/11 attack on America, the 2007/8 financial crisis and Covid-19 in 2020;
3. When leaders are persuaded that a specific problem requires concerted action, such as the Law of the Sea (1973-82), ozone hole (Montreal Protocol 1987), climate change, the International Criminal Court (1998), Landmines Ban (1997) or World Trade Organization (1995).

The first is impossible. A big bang wake-up call will be too late. An extreme environmental disaster, nuclear war or other existential crisis would spread too fast to be contained. It is tempting to hope world leaders would recognise the benefits of reform to avert an existential crisis and work together to create a better system without a crisis. But they won’t. They have too many domestic problems and vested interests to deal with. It is easier to blame others than to work together to solve global problems.  

The second two routes to reform – concerted action by a coalition of the willing in response to a threat or common problem – have already transformed global governance. Coalitions of the willing are the main way in which global governance is reformed in reality. The UN system itself was initiated by a coalition of just 26 nation states in 1942 and founded by a mere 51 nations.  

How reform really happens

We don’t need to wait for consensus or a crisis to bring about radical reforms. All changes in global governance were pioneered by independent actors or small groups of states and agencies responding to need – such as the Red Cross (1863), the Bank of International Settlements (1930), the UN (1945), Earth Summit (1992) and the Sustainable Development Goals (2015).

Many initiatives made progress on difficult issues over the past century through concerted action by relatively small groups taking the initiative, including coalitions of civil society (Jubilee 2000, Landmines ban); corporate initiatives and codes of conduct such as the Sullivan Principles for South Africa; special Rapporteurs of the Secretary General; High Level Panels (HLPs); open working groups; “coalitions of the willing”; Contact Groups of states and agencies; and Track 2, and ‘Citizen diplomacy’. More recently innovative deliberative processes, crowdsourcing and social media have engaged diverse stakeholders in creating solutions and building consensus for change, such as the Sustainable Development Goals.

Initiatives like these should be recognised as the main way in which global governance develops, perhaps under the title of Accelerated Global Actions, with a framework of principles and flexible guidelines as outlined below.

A Plan for Accelerated Global Action (AGA)

Global decision-making can harness initiatives for change by providing recognition, support and guidelines to build consent and ensure legitimacy for Accelerated Global Action. Any agency, state or even individual may initiate action to tackle a critical issue, often in the face of opposition, such as the campaigns on apartheid, climate change, landmines or smoking. Over time, they gain support and lead to changes in international policy or law. To ensure that they are legitimate as well as effective, it is worth drawing up principles and guidelines along the following lines.

Principles

Initiatives to tackle global issues should be transparent; consider evidence from all sides and impartial sources; seek to build trust and mutual understanding; be solution-focused, seeking mutual benefit and win-win solutions; keep stakeholders informed and engaged; and uphold the principles of the United Nations, human rights and the rule of law.

Guidelines

To make the most of global initiatives, we propose that:

First, the UN Department of Public Information (DPI) keeps a public register of initiatives by topic and keep the UN Secretary General (UNSG), GA and member governments informed.

Second, the UNSG, GA and other UN bodies has both the right of initiative and the authority to support accelerated global action on critical issues in their area of competence.

Finally, initiatives should work towards a global consensus on priorities and a plan of action and aim to be endorsed by a recognised world conference or resolution of the UN General Assembly.

By supporting Accelerated Global Actions, the international community can harness people’s commitment to solve problems together better and faster.

Priorities for Accelerated Global Action

Accelerated Global Action is urgently needed in three areas:

1. Containing the coronavirus, developing a vaccine and building health services, particularly in poorer areas and countries, some of which is happening 
2. Creating international mechanisms to fund emergency government spending to protect citizens and the economy, in ways that avoid austerity and excessive debt burdens
3. Investing in innovation and infrastructure to transition to a zero-carbon economy

Accelerated Global Actions in the following areas can build on existing initiatives to create an equitable and effective system of global governance:

1. Education for global citizenship
2. Knowledge and skills sharing
3. Civic engagement
4. Peace and security
5. A global council for economic, environmental and social stability, based on ECOSOC
6. Funding of global public goods
7. Strengthening accountability mechanisms of global governance, including a UN Parliamentary Network
8. International rule of law and a Global Supreme Court

Plus four sectoral and cross-sectoral challenges:

1. Migration and refugees
2. Food Security
3. Artificial intelligence and big data
4. Molecular manufacturing

The second three of these areas aim to create the global consciousness, understanding and capabilities essential for effective global cooperation and decision-making. For more details of what Accelerated Global Action would mean in these areas see A World that Works for Everyone.

Conclusion: making global governance work for all

The best way to bring about change and fulfil the ambitious vision of the Global Governance Prize is not to draft ambitious blue prints and try to persuade politicians to back them, but to seek “gateway reforms” in response to specific threats or common problems and build a determined coalition to solve it, as for the Law of the Sea, Montreal Protocol, Landmines Convention, International Criminal Court, WHO and climate change, but with stronger enforcement mechanisms. 

The first gateway reform is to get UN recognition for Accelerated Global Action (AGA) as a legitimate and effective way of making progress, by bringing these proposed Guidelines and Principles to the UN General Assembly.

At the same time, we need to encourage people to continue their own Accelerated Global Actions in four priority areas:

1. Education for global citizenship
2. Knowledge and skills sharing
3. Civic engagement
4. Peace and security

These four areas are fundamental, because we all need to understand how deeply connected we are, through our shared air, earth, water and humanity. Communications, education, finance, trade and shared decision-making through global institutions have a direct impact on our everyday lives, whether in Afghanistan, Iowa, Wuhan or Zimbabwe.

By taking Accelerated Global Action on critical issues, humanity can usher in a new era of peace, prosperity and social justice, governed by the rule of law and UN values and principles of Freedom, Equality, Solidarity, Tolerance, Respect for nature and Shared responsibility, to create a world that works for everyone.

My question is, is any organisation or group willing to campaign for this proposal to be adopted by the UN or other international agency?

To share this online use this link: https://bit.ly/3c67qLK

Titus Alexander, founder, Charter 99 and Democracy Matters,

Former Chair of Westminster UNA, c. 1996 – 2001

Contributed to Together First, a movement of global citizens, experts, practitioners, civil society activists and business leaders from across the world. See more ideas about how to reform our global system here

Based on a proposal first published by the One World Trust

References

1. UIA (annual) Yearbook of International Organizations, Union of International Associations, Brussels, http: //www.uia.org;
   Hurd, Ian (2010), International Organizations:  Politics, Law, Practice, Cambridge University Press;
   Rittberger, V., Zangl, B. and Kruck, A. (2012) International Organization, 2nd ed. Basingstoke:  Palgrave.
2. Rees, M (2003) Our Final Hour, Basic Books, NY
3. Bostrom, N. (2014), Superintelligence – Paths, Dangers, Strategies, OUP, Oxford
4. Phoenix, C. and Treder, M, (2008) Nanotechnology as global catastrophic risk, in Global   Catastrophic Risks, ed Bostrom, N. and Cirkovic, M. OUP, UK
5. Christopher, F. (Oct 2006) Biotechnology and the challenge to arms control, Arms Control Today
6. Dumitriu, Petru (2016) Knowledge Management In The United Nations System, Joint Inspection Unit,  Geneva:  https: //www.unjiu.org/en/reports-notes/JIU%20Products/JIU_REP_2016_10_English.pdf
   See also:  The Knowledge for Development Partnership (K4D) (2014) Knowledge Development Goals
7. Declaration for Human Rights says signatories will “strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms”; Convention on The Rights of The Child says signatories will provide “education in conditions of peace and security” ; See also World Plan of Action on Education for Human Rights and Democracy – Montréal, 1993)
8. Civic Charter:  The Global Framework for People’s Participation (2016), facilitated by the International Civil Society Centre,  https: //civiccharter.org/about-the-civic-charter-how-it-came-about/

August 10, 2022