Challenges and Evolution of Global Governance

Introduction

Even though the institutions of the global governance are working in full fledge since the post cold war era, the term global governance was coined in the year of 2000 when the operational structure of the United Nations, International Criminal Courts, Security Council of Body and other important global institutions in this regard needed to be referred as one. However, the structure and the position of global governance might be a new concept and still many of the countries are not warmed up enough to welcome and embrace the rules and regulations proposed by the institutes of the global governance. In the post cold war era, the birth of global governance happened around the developed nations of the world, the elite class with the power of colonialism. The countries of the West only had the biggest role to play in controlling the big multilateral global institutions under the global governance but with the shift in multipolarity, entry of non-state actors and the developing countries have threatened the old ways of working of the global governance. In simple words, with the new factors, paving its way into the world politics, have jeopardized the position of global governance.

The world is emerging and changing everyday – politically, economically and socially. The more world changes, the more it brings trouble for the global governance. Herein we shall explain the challenges and the factors that influence the future of the global governance and critically evaluate a possible outline of the future global governance structure and what necessary steps the institutions of the global governance need to embrace in order to survive herein.

The key challenges of Global Governance

In the recent times of the pandemic and Covid-19, it is no wonder global governance is going through a rough time, especially WHO and the UN. The health infrastructure of the world is breaking down and the global governance has proved to be a failure in providing any conclusive information on the particular subject matter and WHO has already been accused of being in a compromised position with China and thus, such misleading information.

---

1. Drentrup, H. (2020); “How WHO Became China’s Coronavirus Accomplice”; Foreign Policy < https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-health-soft-power/ > accessed on 21st June, 2021

However, apart from the recent pandemic situation, the institutes of global governance are dealing with several other issues, as have been reported by the Global Peace Index of 2014. According to GPI, 2014 herein, global governance has been dealing with several issues such as the climate change, the wide range use of cyber space and the hacking and phising of data and the rise in the number of refugees or the displaces people. The civil wars of several countries in the Middle East such as Syria, the recent refugee problem of Myanmar, the Rohingya Muslims have made the global governance paralyzed. According to a report published by UNHCR in the year of 2014, several million people have been displaced since the past decade.

While the abovementioned problems can be sill be considered as a somewhat materialistic problem of the world which can be solved with the cooperation of all the member states herein, the crisis of global governance is attached to some other issues. In order to understand the future of the global governance and the factors which shall attain such future, the root problems of global governance needs to be discussed in details.

The Rise of BRICS or Multipolarity

One of the main challenges of recent time before the global institutions is the rise of BRICS. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – the rise of these five countries as a collective power in the global south of the world has become one of the biggest problems of global governance. The fact that these countries are become powerful with their technologies and their huge population and with times, they are becoming a threat to the West countries herein. The global institutions still work around the Western countries and to their liking. Thus, the rise of BRICS and the summit of BRICS since the year of 2009 has become a huge problem for the working for the global governance as global governance are expected to lose their power hold over the countries of BRICS as the growing tensions increases everyday herein.

The populist politics

The populist politics can be termed as the politics which is based on the term of “we, the people.” Populism can be easily confused with the concept of socialism but both of these

---

2. Global Peace Index (2014); Institute of Economics and Peace
3. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); “UNHCR Global Trends 2013: War's Human Cost”, 20 June 2014
4. Lowe, P. (2016); “The Rise of the BRICS in the Global Economy.” ; Teaching Geography, 41(2), 50–53

concepts are different at the core. The concept of populist politics is democratic in nature and drives for the people against the elite classes herein. Thus, it causes more civil war and less stable countries herein. Also, the populist politics are more into believing conspiracy theories and other misleading information in order to dismantle the current government herein. This unstable subject has been one of the issues for the global governance to hand with the other cyber issues such as hacking and hijacking information as well. In this sector, the global governance is clearly failing as well.

The Role of the non-state actors

Another biggest challenge before the global governance is to identify the recent non-state actors and deal with them herein. The non-state actors can be defined as the big MNCs or the religion extremists and the terrorist groups or the people’s movement and the big media houses of the world. These non-state actors govern and operate a key portion of the world economics and they are responsible for lots of factors such as economical, social or political herein. These non-state actors are hard to control as they do not identify themselves to be belonging to one particular member-state and for most of the time, these non-state actors does not listen to any of the member states as well. They work on their own and influence a huge population especially in the global south and the Middle East. Thus, the tensions in these regions are on a continuous growth herein.

Thus, if there is anything which is posing as a threat to the integrity of the global governance and which is continuously responsible for the grim future or non-functioning of the global institutions, these three key challenges shall be considered as the top three recent challenges of the global governance. Also, with time and the lesser implementation of the global governance’s treaty and other policies have made the people at large in the global south suspicious of the working of the global governance herein. While multipolarity is one of the key issues and the undefined sector of the non-state actors is creating chaos in the smooth functioning of the global governance, the root cause of global governance lies at the fact that global institutions work for the betterment of the developed or the Western countries or the G-10 courtiers. Although global

---

5. Hadiz, Vedi R, and Chryssogelos, A. (2017). “Populism in World Politics: A Comparative Cross-Regional Perspective.” International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale De Science Politique, vol. 38 (4), 399–411
6. Lakhany, F (2006). “How Important Are Non-State Actors.” Pakistan Horizon, 59(3), 37–46.

governance was established with the motive to pacify war in the world after the horrifying incident of the World War-II, global governance was actually created by the Western and powerful countries to keep a check on the developing countries herein. It cannot be denied that global governance works as an agent of the veto nations and work for their benefits.

Thus, the discriminating trade policy and climate policy where the BRICS countries were essentially left out by the other big countries of the world and BRICS collective approach to fight such discrimination is one of the problems where global governance is losing their problems and all the powers of the world are again working on their own. The BRICS countries are positively counting to leave the treaties of the global institutions which might bring the whole world in a brink of war once again. Also, the new establishment of a development bank in China has been seen as an answer to the World Bank and global governance has failed to raise any concern with the issue as well.

Is The Global Governance In Crisis? - The Impact of The Multiplex World In Global Governance

There is not easy answer to the abovementioned question. With the recent pandemic situation and the seeming rise of the Chinese power indeed has created a polarization in power of the big countries. Along with the current G-10 powers, the BRICS nations are essentially emerging as problematic and they have started to demand for their own good and started questioning the unlimited powers that has been given to old Western powers. Along with the rise of BRICS, the Western countries are focusing more on the populist politics and currently they are in a protective sovereign-mood. They are actively refusing to acknowledge the rise of BRICS and the recent world of interdependence herein. Before the Cold war, the interdependence of different countries was only trade based. But in these times of the cyber world, the interdependence between several countries is not only trade based but they are finance and production based as well.

Also, the global interdependence is not just economical at this point. With variety of interdependence happening between the countries which are crossing the boundaries of economics, several other factors are working their way in global governance. There are issues which used to be of only the nation’s problem but with the recent global problem and the global

---

7. Kappel, R. (2105); “Global Power Shifts And Challenges For The Global Order”, IMVF, Policy Paper 2/2015
8. Reisen, H (2013); “Yet Another Development Bank: the BRICS Bank”; Bonn: GDI, DIE. The Current Column

institution’s convincing of the developing countries to join hands with them, this has become a global problem which the institutions of the global governance are unable to solve. The constant flow of refugee, climate change, and extreme human rights abuses by the religious extremists who are the non-state actors and the recent pandemic crisis – the new trend of global interdependence between the countries now have a complex and in-depth problem which the seemingly western countries induced global institutions are failing miserably to handle herein.

Thus, from the above discussion herein it can be safely concluded that the global definition of power cannot merely be described as multiporality or the effect of the populist politics but it is much bigger can complicated issues than that. While the abovementioned three key challenges play a huge role in controlling the functioning of the global governance, it is just the tip of the iceberg. In the light of this discussion herein, it can be said that the global governance is currently dealing with a multiplex world. Thus, the “severe proliferation of the transactional challenges and the constant process of diffusion of ideas and actors and the emergence of new actors in the nature of state or non-state, the old concept of global governance is now in a crisis”. And the nature of crisis is so complex that it cannot be solved with the old dimensions of the international conventions, treaties or with the politics that are dominated by the Western countries occupied with the populist politics herein.

A Critical Assessment Of The Global Governance In A Multiplex World

It is of no doubt that the way currently global governance is moving with their ways with the current situations and the emerging problems, it will be just a matter of time when all the powers of the world shall refuse to compromise with each other and the global governance shall have no use. In the multiplex world where there is not just the issue of multipolarity but the issue of huge globalization along with global interdependence between the countries that are liberal and illiberal herein. Thus, if we critically assess the above-mentioned key challenges to the global governance and the issue of transactional proliferation, it can be said that the future of global governance should be with a clear aim of just surviving.

---

9. Acharya, A. (2016). “The Future of Global Governance”; Global Governance. Vol. 22(1), 453-460
10. Ibid
11. Destradi, S and Cord, J (2015); “Global Governance Debates and Dilemmas: Emerging Powers’ Perspectives and Roles in Global Trade and Climate Governance”; in Strategic Analysis, 39(1), 60-72

If we assess and critically evaluate the condition of global governance under the microscope of today’s world problem where global governance had promised a lot but in reality is unable to do a handful, global governance should concentrate on being just “good-enough”. But the question remains – good enough for whom?

From the historical perspective of the global governance and their working with the current global issues, we can easily assess a pattern of global governance that global governance cannot ever just work as a neutral factor in the world. Depending on the power map, global governance is needed to incline to one power or another in order to function. And if we assess the current shift in power and strategic moves by the countries of the West or the BRICS, it can be assessed with a clear vision that the countries are not essentially crave for the power dynamics but due to the lack of positive reforms within the global governance. The establishment of the Chinese Development Bank or the Brazil’s Contingent Reserve Arrangement is not just a power move for demonstrating their position against the Western countries but a way to show their non-reliance on the working of the global governance herein. According to the BRICS, the global governance has essentially become a stakeholder for the Western powers and just an institution to keep the demands of the Western countries. From the speech of Ms. Florini, it can be seen that global governance had appealed their way into the developing country by targeting their national problems i.e. global governance essentially promised to have a solution for the problems which are of national in nature such as poverty reduction. And although over the course of time, many of such international treaties and conventions have been concluded on such topics but none of the reforms of the global governance have taken the practical shape but they have only retained their theoretical form.

Thus, from critically evaluating the nature of recent global governance from the point of view of the multiplex world, it can be said that global governance is breaking up. If the global institutes intend to keep ground in the world picture, fragmentation is the only way for the global governance. The nature of global governance as being one and only institutions working for the welfare of all the countries – the myth has been busted as all the oppressed countries have finally

---

12. Acharya, A. (2016). “The Future of Global Governance”. Global Governance. Vol. 22(1), 453-460
13. Matthews., J., Florini, A, Steinberg, J. (2003); “The Future of Global Governance”; Brookings Institution/Carnegie Endowment For International Peace Briefing, Washington D.C.
14. Ibid

seen the truth that global governance and their institutions only work in the favor of the Western Countries or the G-10 countries and the G-10 countries, assuming the power shift of the BRICS nations, shall not compromise with their hold on global governance herein.

The Future of Global Governance – What are the Key Factors Behind the Future Growth In The Functioning of the Global GovernanceAs it has already been predicted and asserted by lots of scholars for a long time herein, the future of global governance lies with the concept of fragmentation. If we take substance from the abovementioned assessment and the key challenges in the working of the global governance herein, a division in the global institutions is the only way to keep the basis of global governance and that shall be likely development in the future herein. Thus, if we are to believe at the existence of the global governance in the future, the only logical future of global governance is to keep their way of fragmentation which shall be neither “uniform nor linear in nature”. However, as we have already discussed about the key factors in the crisis of global governance, we shall herein identify the key major factors, which are comprised of the political, economical and social in nature, which might help in deciding the future of global governance herein.

Key Factors Influencing The Fragmentation Of Global Governance



1. Human Rights Abuse

The major human rights abuse is one of the key factors that shall determine the nature of global governance herein. According to the GPI of 2014, the major human rights issues across the world are humongous for e.g. the recent human rights abuse in the country of Myanmar with respect to the Rohingyas Muslims. According to many researchers of the world, the Rohingya issue can be identified as a “preventable genocide by the global governance which was allowed to happen.”

2. Global Atrocity

---

15. Singh, Z. (2013) “Crisis In Global Governance: The Potential Role Of Brics.” World Affairs: The Journal Of International Issues, 17(3), 10–27.
16. Khagram, S. “Possible Future Architectures of Global Governance: A Transnational Perspective/Prospective.” Global Governance, 12(1), 97–117
17. Acharya, A. (2016). The Future of Global Governance. Global Governance. Vol. 22(1), 453-460
18. KHIN, T. (2017); “Rohingya: A Preventable Genocide Allowed to Happen.” Insight Turkey, 19(4), 43–54

Another key factor or the field of failure in the functioning of the global governance is the global atrocities. The recent atrocities that happened in Africa or in Myanmar or in the country of war ridden Syria – global governance has played the role of a mere spectator.

3. The issue of security

With respect to the recent cyberspace problem, security has become a major issue which has been poorly handled by the global governance. From the recent developments of the treaties and conventions, no steps have been taken in order to increase the security and safeguard the international cyber hackings.

4. Health

While health was not on the list of key factors in deciding the future of the global governance but in the light of recent pandemic situation, the failure of the global governance in providing a specific and firm regulation since the beginning of the spread of Covid-19, which in turn has caused the death of millions of the people across the world, has exposed the poor infrastructure of the global governance herein that only works as an agent of the Western Countries.

5. Discriminating Trade Policy

The issue of discriminating trade policy is an issue which has been raised by the BRICS countries for a long time. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) adopted by the WTO herein is entirely for the benefit of the Western Countries and very minimal benefits have been reserved for the developing countries or the countries of the BRICS. Although, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was formed with high promise for the developing countries in the year of 1994, the 2013 Doha Round revitalization failure has given the BRICS nations less hope with the intentions of the WTO.

6. Climate Change and Cyberspace

---

19. Mills, K (2015). “International Responses to Mass Atrocities in Africa: Responsibility to Protect, Prosecute, and Palliate”. 2nd ed. Pennsylvania. University of Pennsylvania Press,
20. Hatuel-Radoshitzky, Michal, et al (2020). “Global Governance and COVID-19: Why International Cooperation Still Matters”; Council on Foreign Relations, 10–12,
21. Destradi, S and Jakobeit. C (2015); “Global Governance Debates and Dilemmas: Emerging Powers’ Perspectives and Roles in Global Trade and Climate Governance”; in Strategic Analysis, 39(1), 60-72

As it had been initially pointed out by the Global Peace Index of 2014 that the issue of climate change and the global concerns raising over cyber space and the global governance’s continuous failure at tackling the issues with firm hands have contributed in the future of the global governance herein.

Thus, from assessing the abovementioned key factors herein along with the major key challenges i.e. the rise of BRICS, the existence of populist politics and the functions of the non-state factors, predictions can be made for the future of the global governance herein.

The Future of Global Governance

The future of global governance lies at the hand of fragmentations. With respect to the growing multiplex world from all the socio-economic perspective herein, the fragmentation of global governance can be predicted into different ways herein. The specific of such fragmentation has been addressed herein:

a) The fragmentation of the global governance is not linear in nature. As it has been described under the key factors herein, in some sectors, the demand is on a rise since the year of 2008 and the actions of global governance is getting strong a little but global governance is rapidly failing in the sector of health, trade and finance herein.

b) The concept of fragmentation is not a new concept and it is not a new phenomenon to be introduced through the global governance herein. It has been in shape and form for a long time herein and the case of fragmentation comes in variety as well.

c) Although the issue of fragmentation as future goal to the global governance can be challenging, it is not impossible to attain. It might be against the popular belief but the old functioning of the global governance and the old institutions herein can work their way into the concept of fragmentation herein and it is not necessary to displace them altogether. This concept can be currently seen in the cases of refugee, finance and in security cases. However, a whole new hegemony for trade to mitigate the conflicts between BRICS and the Western Powers seems to be of absolute necessity.

In the lights of the abovementioned points, the touch of fragmentation is already visible in the functioning of the global governance. If we critically take the topic of human rights, it can be seen that international courts have already relied on the working of the domestic courts and international courts have already joined more than 20 other enforcement courts throughout the world to facilitate a better working system herein.

In the region of security and the armed conflicts, global governance has explicitly taken help of several NGOs across the world and several regional and international agencies in order to keep the armed conflicts in check during the time of 1990-1991. While it may seem messy, the fragmented uses of several organizations have only mend the way of global governance with respect to the multidimensional polarity.

In the sector of finance, along with the International Monetary Fund, the regional hand of the Chinag Mai Initiative (CMI) has been of extreme helpful for the global governance to deal with the financial issues and the same fragmentation use of the regional organizations in handing the climate change issue along with UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) has been contributed a lot in dealing with the BRICS and it has helped in taking the Western countries responsibility for the major carbon emission as well. Thus, this global governance use of fragmentation has been proved to be successful in keeping the BRICS happy and maintaining the multipolarity as well.

The same approach of fragmentation has been of huge help in dealing with the problem of refugee as well. In the recent development, the European Union has helped the global governance immensely in dealing with the refugee problem through pro-rights advocacy groups herein and such way of handling refugee has worked greatly in the issues of Central America and the South East Asian countries as well.

Although from the point of view of the recent pandemic and the emerging cases of Covid-19, it might seem that the WHO is failing. However, with the help of decentralization and fragmentation herein, WHO has taken help from the World Bank and several regional and private NGOs such as the ‘Bill and Melinda Gates foundation’. Such decentralization has reduced the burden of WHO in dealing with the several health issues across the world and it has created

---

22. Chadwick. E (2004). “A TALE OF TWO COURTS: THE 'CREATION' OF A JURISDICTION?” Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 9(1), 71–101
23. Petterson. T (2015); “Armed Conflict – 1946 -2014”; Journal of Peace Research, 52(4) , 536
24. Kappel, R. (2015); “Global Power Shifts And Challenges For The Global Order”; IMVF, Policy Paper 2/2015

better funding system to help the needy in the war-ridden areas better as well. The example of such fragmentation and better governance can be essentially taken from the widespread disease of Ebola in the regions of Africa herein.

Thus, the working of the fragmentation does not necessarily mean the decline in the functioning of the global governance as we have known them since the post World War era. With the changing global times, it has been necessary for the global governance to take partial help from several regional bodies in order to keep the countries in line and prevent BRICS from completely cutting the ties with the global governance. The future of global governance is necessarily in the fragmentation as it keeps the interest of the Western countries in control and the needs of the other countries are made in a proportionate way as well.

Conclusion

Hence if we can critically evaluate the abovementioned functioning of the global governance herein, it is evident that fragmentation is the only future global governance can seek unless global governance dissolves into a ruin and the world resets its button the previous power struggle and war mode. It is true that global governance has severely failed in handling the recent pandemic situation and the war ridden areas of the Middle East countries, but with the help of several regional and non-state actors herein, global governance is slowly and steadily getting the hang of the world and it has worked pretty good in the field of refugee and the ongoing armed conflict issues between countries. Even though global institutions under the global governance originated from the Western hegemony and the G-10 countries, global governance is steadily working its way into becoming its true definition i.e. global in nature. The regional and domestic help and the non-state actors’ aid in the working of global governance shall only facilitate the overall functioning and this way of fragmentation is the ultimate future of the global governance herein.

---

25. Levich, J. (2015). The Gates Foundation, Ebola, and Global Health Imperialism. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 74(4), 704-742

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Article

Drentrup, H. (2020); “How WHO Became China’s Coronavirus Accomplice”; Foreign Policy < https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-health-soft-power/ > accessed on 21st June, 2021

Book

Mills, K (2015). “International Responses to Mass Atrocities in Africa: Responsibility to Protect, Prosecute, and Palliate”. 2nd ed. Pennsylvania. University of Pennsylvania Press

Journal

Acharya, A. (2016). The Future of Global Governance. Global Governance. Vol. 22(1), 453-460

Chadwick. E (2004). “A TALE OF TWO COURTS: THE 'CREATION' OF A JURISDICTION?” Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 9(1), 71–101

Destradi, S and Cord, J (2015); Global Governance Debates and Dilemmas: Emerging Powers’ Perspectives and Roles in Global Trade and Climate Governance; in Strategic Analysis, 39(1), 60-72

Hadiz, Vedi R, and Chryssogelos, A. (2017). “Populism in World Politics: A Comparative Cross-Regional Perspective.” International Political Science Review / Revue Internationale De Science Politique, vol. 38 (4), 399–411

Hatuel-Radoshitzky, Michal, et al (2020). “Global Governance and COVID-19: Why International Cooperation Still Matters”; Council on Foreign Relations, 10–12

Khin, T. (2017); “Rohingya: A Preventable Genocide Allowed to Happen.” Insight Turkey, 19(4), 43–54

Khagram, S. “Possible Future Architectures of Global Governance: A Transnational Perspective/Prospective.” Global Governance, 12(1), 97–117

Lowe, P. (2016); “The Rise of the BRICS in the Global Economy.” ; Teaching Geography, 41(2), 50–53

Lakhany, F (2006). “How Important Are Non-State Actors.” Pakistan Horizon, 59(3), 37–46.

Levich, J. (2015). The Gates Foundation, Ebola, and Global Health Imperialism. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 74(4), 704-742

Petterson. T (2015); “Armed Conflict – 1946 -2014”; Journal of Peace Research, 52(4) , 536

Singh, Z. (2013) “Crisis In Global Governance: The Potential Role Of Brics.” World Affairs: The Journal Of International Issues, 17(3), 10–27.

Reports/Others

Kappel, R. (2105); “Global Power Shifts And Challenges For The Global Order”, IMVF, Policy Paper 2/2015

Reisen, H (2013); “Yet Another Development Bank: the BRICS Bank”; Bonn: GDI, DIE. The Current Column

Matthews., J., Florini, A, Steinberg, J. (2003); “The Future of Global Governance”; Brookings Institution/Carnegie Endowment For International Peace Briefing, Washington D.C.

Treaties/UN Documents

Global Peace Index (2014); Institute of Economics and Peace

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); “UNHCR Global Trends 2013: War's Human Cost”, 20 June 2014

Dig deeper into Brexit's Impact on the EU-27: Challenges, Reforms with our selection of articles.