Politics

反思国际机构

Nov 15, 2013 Pascal Lamy and Ian Goldin

牛津—近七十年前，在二战结束后，当联合国和布雷顿森林机构成立时，经济和政治实力集中在少数“战胜”国手里，因此关于如何重建国际秩序的问题比较容易达成共识。但是，自此以后，全球治理就变得日益复杂，阻挠了哥全球关注领域的进展。

如今，不但有190多个国家属于联合国；更有各种公共资金国际机构层出不穷，而自二战以来还从未有一个多边机构关门。其结果是效率低下，令出多门，莫衷一是。

与此同时，国际体系中的大部分缺少足够资金在关键领域取得有意义的进展——随着不断增长的全球人口的需要和期望的增加，这一问题只会越来越严重。在这样的情况下，在气候变化、网络犯罪、收入不平等和疾病的长期负担等全球性问题上取得进展变得十分艰难。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Pascal Lamy

Writing for PS since 2009
9 Commentaries

Pascal Lamy, President of the Paris Peace Forum, is a former director-general of the World Trade Organization and EU trade commissioner.

Ian Goldin

Writing for PS since 2011
10 Commentaries

Ian Goldin is Professor of Globalization and Development at the University of Oxford and the co-author (with Robert Muggah) of Terra Incognita: 100 Maps to Survive the Next 100 Years.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 4 Comments on this article

hari naidu Nov 21, 2013

If you've worked in Brussels, in 1980s, NGOs emergence created a serious institutional problem for Commission and EP.
Eventually NGOs got a bite into Commission budget - approved by EP - thereafter their political power and influence grew on policy issues specially in development assistance.

Today, NGOs have more or less taken over chunks of global
policy monitoring and advise, including Human Rights.

Under WTO, we made serious mistakes by globalizing international finance without (sovereign) frontiers and control - ASEAN crisis illustrated value sovereign exchange controls in crisis times (eg. India and mainland China).
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Zsolt Hermann Nov 18, 2013

I fully agree with the writers that in today's global, interdependent world a completely new governing and executive system is necessary.
But unless we understand the full extent of this need and start building from the foundations, the changes will not be successful.
Europe provides a perfect example right in front of our eyes.
Due to the fear of "political suicide" from the beginning the architects of the European Union and the Eurozone have shunned the notion of full union, building the assembly from ground up.
And we could say previously they did not have enough scientific data and real life experience to show people that this is the only way of building a sustainable, mutual cooperation.
But today we have all the data necessary both from scientific evaluations of our global, natural, integral system, about humanity's place with the system of nature and our interconnections with each other, and most importantly we are 'collecting" the negative data day by day as politicians, economists, and other professionals try trick after trick to avoid the only possible solution and driving the global human society deeper into crisis with each attempt.
In a global, fully interconnected and interdependent human system all our previous methods and tools are failing as they are based on an isolationist, polarized, competitive model that has become obsolete and harmful.
In a natural, integral system only mutual responsibility and mutually complementing cooperation is capable of providing sustainable success and prosperity.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Fabio Souza Nov 18, 2013

It's a long road for goverments, businesses and civil society work together, but it's possible. As Mr. Soros put the question about regulation in global financial markets, they all need global regulation, but the root of its regulations lies in the State sovereignty rather than an internacional rule. So it keeps markets anarchy and disruptions.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Eric Nordin Nov 18, 2013

The proliferation of “international non-government organizations” while attempting to achieve a more egalitarian world, has produce diminishing returns. Although such organizations may be well intentioned, they have succeeding in over-complicating many of the issues facing the global community - redundancies and inefficiencies abound. As the authors point out, efforts should be streamlined to assuage the problems facing the international community, not diversified. This will produce more optimal outcomes for the individuals these organizations are attempting to help.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/eyTAgeZzh

Email required

Password required Remember me?

Facebook

Microsoft

Twitter

反思国际机构

Subscribe to PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

反思国际机构

Subscribe to PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification