Financial Crisis and Global Governance essay

To begin with, it should be noted that the issueof global governanceusually appears in the contextof globalization. Particularly, with theworldwide accelerationof interdependenciesbetween human societiesand betweenhumankindandthe biosphere, global governanceis used to definetherulemakingon this scale. In other words, many people consider that the architecture of futureworld should be closely related with theestablishment ofa system ofglobal governance.

However, there is a particular problem today: whilesome time ago, the main goal of global governance was mainlyto regulate andlimit the powerof countries to preventimbalancesandmaintain the status quo – nowadays, the current challengeof global governanceis tohave agreatercollective weighton the fateof the worldby establishinga system of regulationofthese numerousinteractions, which definitelyoutweigh the possibility ofone country’s actions. By contrast, thepolitical homogenizationof the planet, thanks to the emergenceofliberal democracy, which is declined indifferentways, seems to facilitatethe establishment of aglobal governance systemthatexceeds themarketlaissez-faire and democratic peaceimaginedoriginally byImmanuelKant, and today, can be consideredas a kind ofgeopolitical laissez-faire policy, as stated in Global governance after the financial crisis: A new multilateralism or the last gasp of the great powers?

It should be noted that the result of multiple work in several continents, various scales of governance and different areas of public action, the Charles Mayer and his partners have developed five principles underlying the global governance. Thus, the main problems of global governance can be analyzed in light of the following principles:

• Legitimacy and practice of power. In particular, this principle states that people need to generate a solid agreement regarding how they are governed. As well, people in authority should be considered as trustworthy. Also, the limits on private freedoms should be as small as possible and clearly arising from the needs of the common good that society organization settles on an ethical foundation recognized and respected by society.
• It is part of a handful of undemocratic international institutions and without a true or complete legitimacy, that important decisions are made that affect the global economy, and no longer at the level of representative institutions (state or territorial units whose leaders are elected directly). While coordination efforts and action are established by these institutions (and specifically the United Nations) they have proved insufficient to eliminate or even significantly reduce poverty, injustice and inequality, or to take action to reduce degradation environment, as stated in The G-20 Summit: Could the Financial Crisis Push Global Governance Reform?

According to Jan AartScholte, there is a vicious circle between development and legitimacy of international institutions and global governance. He argues that the global governance remains weak as a whole compared with the needs of global public policy. Gaps in matters of morality, legal bases, materials supply, democratic recognition and charismatic leaders have created a deficit of legitimacy of existing regimes. In turn, this fragile legitimacy constitutes a major obstacle to a substantial growth of global regulations to ensure a decent life for all in a globalizing world. Deficiencies and lack of legitimacy of global governance, therefore, are an impediment to a mutual booster. “And if regulations aren’t in place by then, we could easily experience something similar to what happened in 2008.”, as described in How shadow banks rule the world.

According to Pierre Calame, “current regulations do not fall short of interdependencies (…) any initiative to strengthen these regulations will not find popular support if the legitimacy of existing initiatives already questioned. And this is in effect the UN has often seen as an expensive farce. Their democratic legitimacy is limited, blocked by the veto of some big countries in the Security Council and the hypocrisy of the “one state, one vote”, that aims to equality terms to countries like Nepal, Burkina Faso and EE.UU. The same crisis of legitimacy is affecting the World Bank and IMF, which became practical tools for action byrich countries over the poor, as stated in How shadow banks rule the world. There was a proliferation of international rules issued by authorities without visible face, no clear mandate, without resorting identifiable instances, which not only undermine the authority and effectiveness of these standards, but also discredit the claim to make further below, even on subjects you can complain about the law of the jungle and the proliferation of injustice, as stated in Global Financial Crisis.

On one side the problem lies in the actual practice, particularly at international level, the existing regulatory framework (conventions and laws), as shown by Rolf Künemann. Although other sources claim that even some international institutions themselves do not respect the Convention of Human Rights. On the other hand, attempts to conceptualize and create new rights are part of a process of theoretical and policy development of the new global governance begins to take shape. One example is the concept of decent work developed by OIT and the right to water, widely supported bycivil society.

Finally, regarding the development of alternative proposals, the Forum for a Charter of Human Responsibilities legal paper argues that the notion of secondary liability is a serious problem in the framework of a new global organizational model that is based on the development instead of sustainable productivism and aggressive growth. In this sense, a common legal basis should be used to establish the necessary legitimacy. The establishment of the latter can be based on three pillars: the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Charter of Human Responsibilities. The latter would be a parallel and complementary document to the above, consists of the set of human responsibilities worldwide, and is the result of an ongoing process of participatory writing open to all citizens.

Today you can raise the issue of the links between local and global, and between levels of government, as part of the construction of a new global governance, from three angles:articulating own scales of governance; the internal transformation of the state and its evolving role in the overall framework of governance; the construction of new forms of coexistence between states and public institutions in general reflect best real joints between societies.

The establishment of effective global governance, global government different from a standardized, reveals the problem of their coexistence with the states, they must accept the loss of important parts of their sovereignty in favor of global and other scales. They try to get real articulation of skills and interactive operation between all these scales, from local to global. This requires establishing common rules, and to make them truly democratic decisions made at the level of the base should become the only raw material of higher scales work, which should ensure social cohesion to global, as described inChanging Times: Global Governance Reform and the IMF.

Some authors have conceptualized a new type of state that must correspond to a broader governance and articulated in different scales. For Ulrich Beck, who advocates the idea of ​​”cosmopolitan state”, “in the same way that a religious state allows practice of various religions, a cosmopolitan state should ensure the coexistence of national and religious identities through the principle of constitutional tolerance.

Another author suggests the evolving world to a “post-modern states system” with the following characteristics:
The abolition of the distinction between domestic and foreign affairs;
The mutual interference in the internal affairs (traditional) and mutual surveillance;
The refusal to use force as a means of conflict resolution and, therefore, encoding self-enforcing rules of conduct;
The gradual decline of the importance of borders due to the changing role of the State, and also of missiles, satellites and motor vehicles;
Security based on transparency, mutual openness, interdependence and mutual vulnerability.

However, this does not guarantee that “the national state is not named, in the future, play an important role. Instead, continue to embody the collective destiny of the people, will continue, no doubt, the main level of building social cohesion, public service delivery, the practice of law and justice, redistribution and solidarity. Nevertheless, a state built on other grounds as a scale, is certainly important, governance, although a scale among others, articulated to the other”, as stated in Pathways Through Financial Crisis.

Some authors have also tried building the regional level and the reform of the UN system. For example, Pierre Calame and Gustavo Marin consider “The architecture of global governance can not be conceived without an overhaul of the nation-states themselves, without a redefinition of its role, its procedures and its relationship with other political orders.” At the same time, they argue that “it is essential to support the emergence of a regional, intermediate between the States and the world.” In turn, the Security Council “should be a body composed of representatives of the regions. Every country in a region is corresponding spin their chairmanships and, during that time, representation in international negotiations”.

Finally, articulate and democratic global governance also involves a redefinition of the role of the territories and base units to achieve the appearance of a constituent citizen power.

Building aresponsible globalgovernancethat matches thepolitical organizationof societyto globalization, involves the formationof ademocraticpolitical legitimacyin allterritorial scales(local, state, regional, global).For thislegitimacytakes place, we need to rethinkand reform, while:
The nebulaconsists ofvarious international organizations, largely inherited fromthe aftermathof the SecondWorld War: itneeds a system ofinternationalorganizationswithmore resourcesand capabilities, more transparent, fairer and more democratic;
TheWestphalia system, thenature ofthe states andtheirrole in relation toother institutions, and the relationshipsbetween them: Statesshould sharesome of their sovereigntytootherinstitutions and bodiesandterritorial scales, whilethese have toundertakean important processofdeepeningdemocraticandorganizationalaccountability.
The meaningof citizen sovereigntyin the differenttiers of governmentand the roleof citizenship as aprotagonist in politics: we need to rethinkthe meaningof representationandpolitical participation, andplant the seedfor a radical changeof consciousness that allowsmove towards asituation in whichthe publicplaysin practice, the lead role inall scales, as stated in The two ways of global governance after the financial crisis: Multilateralism versus cooperation among governments.

Thepolitical problemsof global governancehas been addressedin more detailinthe sectiononglobal governanceissuesandgovernance principles. Several actors have developed lists of proposals for a new global governance more accountable, just, compassionate, articulate and respectful of the diversity of the planet. Among them are:Joseph E. Stiglitzwho proposed a list of reforms on the internal organization and the role of international institutions in the framework of global governance. Also including the global tax issues, management of global resources and the environment, production and protection of global knowledge, and the need for a global legal infrastructure. There are other proposals, published in book proposals for global governance: realizing the principle of accountability, increasing the involvement of civil society in the formulation and implementation of international law, improve the involvement of national parliaments in developing and implementation of international law; rebalance the benefit of the South, the modalities of negotiation and law enforcement; accelerate the creation of regional assemblies; extend and clarify the concept of common good; distinguish the powers of proposal and decision to rebuild United Nations Develop independent monitoring, warning and assessment; diversify and stabilize the financial base of international collective action, launching a comprehensive consultation process, a new Bretton Woods to United Nations, as stated in Global Imbalances and the Financial Crisis.

Another example of a list of proposals is as follows:

“The safety of society and its correlation with the need for global reforms –is an economy run and based on law, oriented towards stability, growth, full employment and the North-South convergence; Equal rights for all, which involves establishing a logic of global redistribution; Eradication of poverty in all countries; Global sustainable development as essential imperative of policy at all scales; Tackling the roots of the fight against terrorism and crime; International institutions consistent, efficient and fully democratic;Europe will share their experience of responding to the challenges of globalization and establish true partnership strategies in the context of a new multilateralism, as stated in Economic Global Governance Must Incorporate Authentic Moral Standards.

Dr. Rajesh Tandon, President of the FIM (International Forum of Montreal) and president of PRIA (Participatory Research in Asia), prepared for the conference “Global Democracy: visions and strategies of civil society (G05)” a document- that is a framework called “democratization of global governance, in which he presented five principles that could be based on the actions of civil society:The institutions and global agenda should be subject to democratic accountability.Democratic politics requires a globally popular legitimacy-back control mechanism of direct representation. Public participation in decision-making at the global level requires equal opportunities for all citizens of the world.The democratization of decision making at all levels should be supported jointly by the instances that correspond to these scales (local, provincial, national, regional and global).

Global democracy should ensure that all public wealth are accessible on a global equitable to all citizens of the world. The exponential growth ofnew technologies and especiallythe Internet, hasbeenaccompaniedover the past decadeby thedevelopment of a genuineglobal communityof production and exchangeof goods thatisforever changing thelandscapeofcultural industries, publishing,music andmedia, among others, andinfluencing thesocialbehaviorof agrowing numberof people, as well as patterns oforganization of institutions, business and civilsociety. Communitiesbeyondpeer-to-peer andcollective developmentprojectsof knowledge, such asWikipedia, are involvingmillions ofusers around theworld, there areeven moreinnovativeaspects, suchas the types ofalternatives topropertyprivate property astheCreativeCommons, and thepractice ofcyberand the real possibilityof developing itat sectoral, regional and global levels.

Again,withthe financial crisis in2008,the mythof the marketcan correctitselfonly its ownserious financialdysfunctionsevaporatedand thesupposed independenceof the economy. International financial institutionshave failed to resolvethe fundamental flawsof the market,and continue to beopaqueand undemocraticorganizations, as stated in The Demand for Global Governance: Containing the Spread of the Financial Crisis to the Trade Sector.

All in all, the market economyis unable, by itself, to meet the needsof the population. Without regulationwithouttakingenvironmental and socialexternalities, liberal capitalismis becoming acrazy machinethat produces morewealth concentrated infew hands, and leads to theworld communityto the explosionand chaos. This is notto question thecapacityof the system,but the absence ofredistribution, following ascandalousabsence offormidablepolitical and civicdeterminationto transformthe game. Asimple definitionofextensiveglobal governanceuses this termto referto the set ofrules governing the organizationof human societiesin scale ofaglobalcontractrulesbetween countriesand continents.As stated in How shadow banks rule the world, “In the financial world, there is a narrow divide between heaven and hell.”