Global Civil Society as an Indispensable Global Governance Policy Making Actor towards Global Problem Solving in Advancing Humanity: Global Devt Case

Global Civil Society (GCS) refers to the global public sphere especially organizing principles such as International NGOs, Policy Think Tanks, Academic Research Institutes and Centers, Lobby Groups, Foundations, Movements, Charity Organizations, Fraternal Organizations, Workers Unions etc. GCS significantly improves the quality of global policy making and global policy in turn leads to improvement in the quality of lives of people or society all over the world.

?“One of the defining terms of contemporary society is globalization. It is seen as also one of the greatest challenge confronting humanity today” (Scholte, 2005). It is whereby increasingly large and complex relations and interdependencies are formed among the world’s people (Florini, 2000; Hugue and Zafarullah, 2006; Sinclair, 2012; Vedder, 2007; Vos and Montes, 2013). Hugue and Zafarullah defines globalization as “ the growth of supraterritorial?relations among people creating a complex series of connections that tie together what people do, what they experience and how they live across the globe” (2006, p. 77). A situation undergoing rapid growth due to the information revolution, increment in integration of the world economy, exponential growth in world population ( Deacon, 2007; Florini, 2000; Nayyar, 2002; Walker and Thompson, 2008) and dissolution of the Cold War ( Avant et al, 2010).

However, it has led to plethora of new global problems. This includes increase poverty, climate change, poor resource management, spread of diseases, widening inequality gap among others (Florini, 2000; Nayyar, 2002; Walker and Thompson, 2008; Vos and Montes, 2013). Globalization is the biggest challenge confronting humanity today (Scholte, 2005; Weiss, 2016). Nayyar (2002) and Weiss (2016) both agree that the world’s responding capacity does not match with the numerous global threats that has emerge. Vos & Montes also suggest the idea that it is only “global solutions” that are required to address “global problems” (2013, p. 7). From this, it implies that because there is globalization of problems then there must be globalization of solutions.

There is therefore a need to find global solutions to the huge world problems brought about by globalization. But there is no world government (Dany, 2013, p.1; Weiss, 2016, p.1) to help tackle them. From various definitions of globalization, it is clear that everything is shared among the world’s people but with the exception of the political system which is still confined within borders (Weiss, 2016, p.1). Hence, a mechanism needs to be devise by the world’s people to help in this regard. An “overarching but non authoritarian central authority” is welcome (Weiss, 2016, pp. 2-6). Such was established. This is termed “global governance”. It involves cooperative action from multiple actors in the world in providing a “global solution” to “global problems” (Sinclair, 2012; Vedder, 2007; Weiss, 2016). Global governance is not world government (Nayyar, 2002, p. 14). “Global governance has assumed such prominence among scholars and policy analysts in recent years. The concept has gone from the ranks of the unknown to one of the central orienting themes in the practice and study of international affairs” (Weiss, 2016, p. 7).

Global governance denotes a situation where in the absence of political globalization in the form of a world government, the world’s people collectively strive in solving cross-border problems through application of multiple actors and multiple interventions (Avant et al, 2010; Dany, 2013; Deacon, 2007; Florini, 2000; Nayyar, 2002; Scholte, 2005; Vedder, 2007). Nayyar (2002) defined global governance as “institutions and practices combined with rules that facilitate cooperation among sovereign nation-states” (p. 14). Dany’s definition of global governance captures the multi-actors and collective actions among the world’s people in addressing global the threats: it is a situation whereby “different kinds of actors maintain global order by collaborating at different levels with the aim of finding common solutions to emerging cross-border policy issues” ( 2013, p.1). Avant et al (2010) also defines it as that of Dany’s: “a complex web of relationships among multiple actors accomplishing different tasks and dependent on each other for outcomes” or “authorities who exercise power across borders for purposes of affecting policy”. They further describes the actors involve in global problem solving as “global governors”.

?

Global governance is driven by a set of ideas. Sinclair (2012) examined the importance of shared ideas among the world’s people in tackling the global problems.?There are two types of ideas in international affairs management: “Rationalist Understanding” that implies selection of ideas base on their merit and success and “Social Construction” denoting collectively held ideas. Comparatively, collectively held ideas are powerful tools in global problem solving. The current global governance arrangements such as the establishment of institutions like the UN are as a result of collectively held ideas. With respect to establishment of global governance institutions, Sinclair further explores two competing theories: “Liberalism/Idealism” and “Realism”.?Liberalism holds that cooperative action among sovereign states in solving global problems is possible through institutions whiles Realism opposes such a theory. Realists believe states only exist to further their parochial national interests. Surely, the idealist theory underpins establishment of all global governance structures.

In consonance with global governance arrangements, international institutions like United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Bretton Woods: World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) were created (Dany, 2013; Walker & Thompson, 2008; Willetts, 2011). This resulted in an unintended consequence of tacking decisions outside the national borders of people without their involvement (Walker & Thompson, 2008) which is undemocratic (Lindblom, 2005). To rectify this anomaly, GCS has emerged on the global stage representing the global public interest in global decision making. Their involvement in global governance is not only to democratize global policy but to principally significantly improve global decision making (Dany, 2013, pp. 13-14). As globalization is speedily turning the world into a single organization or family, cosmopolitan principles are also on the increase with GCS at the forefront of it. Their ethical authority on global issues symbolizes them as the “conscience” of global governance (Florini, 2000; Walker & Thompson, 2008; Vedder, 2007) as they seek advancement of humanity ( Dany, 2013; Florini, 2000) making them a key constituency in global governance and indispensable[1] to it. “NGOs are expected to provide the world’s underprivilege and underrepresented a voice” (Dany, 2013, p. 8).

Global governance implies application of cosmopolitan principles. This means “global citizenship” or “all of humanity” involvement in global problem solving (Walker & Thompson, 2008).?The cosmopolitanism situation occurring among the world’s people create a “consciousness” of oneness of humanity, seeing the world as one place and motivated to promote the common welfare of mankind ( Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, p. 77; Jackson & Sorensen, 2010, pp. 96-100). The increasingly complex and broad transnational connections and interdependencies been formed among the world’s population is causing the realization of our common humanity ( Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006; Jackson & Sorensen, 2010; Steger, 2013). This concept of cosmopolitanism also underpins the emergence of GCS as an actor in global governance. Their involvement in global governance represents a “key innovation” (Walker & Thompson, 2008) and create a condition of a global public sphere (Best & Gheciu, 2014; Leonard, 2005). Their presence in global governance is a form of an “emerging transnational action” (Florini, 2000). GCS is a “democratic movement dedicated to involving the citizens of this world in the decisions that affect their daily lives” and “distinguished by the concept of participation” (Walker & Thompson, 2008).

GCS has been operating transnationally to further human progress as far back as the global campaign to ban slavery (Dany, 2013; Florini, 2000; Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006; Walker & Thompson, 2008).?In contemporary times, their involvement in global governance has yielded numerous achievements for human progress. Without their influence certain key accomplishment of humanity would not have occurred. This includes signing of the Ottawa Treaty and creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (Dany, 2013) and signing of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty as well as development of new standards to evaluate Heads of governments and corporations (Florini, 2000). The pre-eminent global governance institution is the UN. During it creation, a formal relationship was formed with GCS through the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) enabling them to significantly impact global policy for human advancement (Dany, 2013; Walker & Thompson, 2008; Willetts, 2011). But they have managed to influence the whole UN system (Willetts, 2011, pp. 32-68; Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, p. 421).

Florini (2000, p. 7) defines GCS as “Groups that are not governments or profit-seeking private entities that are transnational and taking a variety of forms such as a single INGO with Chapters in several countries”. Or it can be given the definition as an “essentially non-profit, voluntary citizens group which is organized at a local, national or international level and is locally, nationally or international active” ( Vedder, 2007).?The world now recognizes GCS to have the capacity to greatly influence global policy (Dany, 2013; Florini, 2000; Steffek, 2010; Walker & Thompson, 2008). They are the “third force” (Florini, 2000) or the “third superpower” (Walker & Thompson, 2008) in global governance behind states and corporations (Florini, 2000).

The work of Florini (2000) reveals that there are three global governance actors: states, corporations and civil society. GCS is turning out to be integral to global governance in solving the numerous global threats. The large network of connections they form across borders is key to their leverage over global issues. This makes them to further the common good of humanity. Acting as the “conscience” of global governance, they seek to represent the interest of the global public (pp. 4-9). The world now recognizes the power of GCS to immensely impact global policy because of their expertise in technicalities of global issues, research competencies and policy impact of their input (Dany, 2013; Steffek, 2010; Walker & Thompson, 2008). In addition, they are a source of quality information and possess moral authority as they seek to enhance human progress (Florini, 200, pp. 3-11). This makes many scholars to claim that they have a high degree of influence on global governance (Florini, 2000; Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006; Walker & Thompson, 2008).

Avant et al (2010); Steffek (2010) and Scholte (2005) all believe in the indispensability of GCS to global governance and link that to their increasing involvement in global policy determination. Carbonnier (2012) discusses that GCS can be integral to global governance only if certain conditions are met. In that their role in global governance need to be strengthened. This occurrence will lead to the advancement of the course of humanity since that is their prime focus in global governance. For Lindblom (2005), GCS principal duty in global governance is to legitimize/democratize global policy. Since the making of global decisions beyond national borders of people is undemocratic, the presence of GCS on the global stage corrects such a democratic deficit. Dany (2013) argues that the involvement of GCS in global governance should necessarily lead to significant improvement in global policy making but that is not the case. She reveals that though GCS participation in global governance has massively increase in recent times, it does not always results in the production of better policies for the world’s people. Dany disagrees with widespread assumptions shared among scholars concerning the indispensability of GCS to global governance. GCS is viewed worldwide as hope bearers of the global public. But their influence is limited (p. 16). Dany questions (p.21) the worldwide held assumptions of a strong correlation between GCS participation in global governance and their influence (p. 13).

GCS are extremely important to global decision making and as such their involvement in global governance is on a rapid increase. The interconnected and interdependence among the world’s people is growing and so are the global problems. Hence the multi-actors in global governance, with GCS as a key part, need to cooperate effectively in resolving global problems. GCS indispensability is evident by their increasing participation in global affairs management (Vedder, 2007). Deacon also confirms their increasing involvement in global governance and attribute that to their indispensability (2007, p. 19). Walker & Thompson contribute to the debate on the role of GCS in global governance. They explain that the presence of GCS in global governance is to ensure “ethical globalization” as their primary focus is to help tackle global problems that states and international institutions are unable and unwilling to address for lack of political will and the protection of national interests. GCS role is increasing in global governance because they are to significantly help improve global policy formulation and implementation (2008, p. 16).

According to Dany, GCS increase involvement in global governance is because they legitimize global policy and legitimization of global policy means promoting welfare of humanity (2013, p. 6). Florini (2000) found out that GCS are able to significantly impact global policy moreso because of their moral authority. Since the transnational agenda is very complex (p.3), GCS is a powerful and an enduring force in the 21st century functioning as a key “global rule maker” in effectively confronting all facets of the global agenda. But Dany (2013) disagrees with these findings of Florini and others: “contrary to what NGO researchers usually assume, the participation of NGOs in international negotiations does not necessarily lead to better and more ambitious policy outcomes” (p. 16). GCS influence in global governance is limited. Though their existence helps to promote human welfare particularly in the UN system, they do not have a high influence on global policy determination.

Global governance is very broad as it caters for all areas of global concern. A key area of it is global development governance. GCS has been more vibrant, potent and well recognized in this area (Walker & Thompson, 2008) exerting enormous pressure on the Bretton Woods and WTO to formulate policies to promote global good (Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, p. 31). Global governance and in particular international development governance needs improvement for better management of the world (Weiss, 2016, p.6). Defects in global development governance were exposed when the world was faced with severe crises in the global economy recently (Vos & Montes, 2013, pp. 6-7).

To correct this, new thinking of reform is required. Key to this is formulation of a comprehensive global sustainable development policy to help improve wealth creation, close the inequality gap and protect the environment among others (Vos & Montes, 2013). This reform is achievable with strong involvement of GCS (Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006). Also there is a new thinking of a “moral concern” for the world’s poor and underprivileged (Deacon, 2007, p. 19). This provides GCS enormous opportunities to greatly impact global development policy (Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, pp. 421-422) because of their expertise in the technicalities of global issues, research competencies, policy impact (Dany, 2013; Steffek, 2010; Walker & Thompson, 2008) as well as their possession of quality information and “moral authority” ( Florini, 2000, pp. 3-11). In the goal of successfully tackling global threats and advancing human progress, GCS is an essential component (Carbonnier, 2012, p. 14). And a need for their greater involvement is ever growing (Deacon, 2007, p. 144) hence a need for them to be strengthened in order to advance human progress (Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, pp. 31-32).

Specifically, in the area of global development governance, GCS is a key part of the multiple actors involve in international development policy determination (Carbopnnier, 2012, pp. 15-16; Deacon, 2007, p. 144; Hugue & Zafarullah, 2006, pp. 31-32). Williams (2012) suggests the multiple actors in global development governance with GCS as a central component is powered also by the establishment of a new international order known as the “Liberal Order” or “World/Global Order’. This Order created after World War 2 is one of the forces behind increment in globalization and it permits multiple actors in global development governance.

Deacon observes that the international system is witnessing a shift in recent times whereby there is a “moral concern” for the world’s poor and underprivilege. In this GCS is at the forefront of it. GCS are actively and significantly involve in global governance in general and global development governance in particular in tackling?the worst effects of economic globalization such as widening inequality gap and climate change (2007, p. 19). In the specific area of global development governance, the new actors beyond national borders are much evident with GCS a key component. GCS are much potent and effective in the area of international development governance (Carbonnier, 2012, pp. 14-16). Hugue and Zafarullah (2006) discuss how GCS actors demonstrate their impact on the UN system as they become increasingly important to global governance. GCS always places enormous pressure on international development organizations such as the Bretton Woods and WTO for reforms that will enhance human wellbeing. They greatly influence their policies. For international development processes to improve, a very powerful GCS is needed (pp. 31-32).

The basis for their capability in enormously influencing global policy is due to their possession of better information in confronting the interconnected global policies of climate change, sustainable development, resource management and poverty. GCS emergence on the international stage signifies innovation in tackling particularly global economic and social issues. The UN harnesses their strength and their exponential participation in the global governance system attest to their indispensability. Generally, there is now an inordinate increase in the role played by GCS in global governance, moreso with the UN towards promoting human progress. In the 1990s, about 1300 NGOs gathered at Seattle to influence WTO negotiations and 4, 000 also participated in the Beijing Women Conference. This huge involvement of GCS in global governance suggests their significant impact on global policy. Their organization at the global stage has the potential to greatly direct global policy towards the interest of the global public good (Walker & Thompson, 2008, pp. 29-35).

GCS has an important part to play in global governance. Their involvement continues to increase in global policy determination. They are “key actors” and “indispensable” to global governance. GCS have a role in improving global governance in the effective, efficient and innovative way or mechanism of global problem solving through their impact on international/global policy formulation. GCS is an essential component of global leadership in solving the numerous problems confronting the world today.??

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

REFERENCES

?

1.?????Avant, D.D., Finnemore, M. and Sell, S.K. (eds.) (2010). Who Governs the Globe? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

2.?????Best, J. and Gheciu, A. (eds.) (2014). The Return of the Public in Global Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

3.?????Carbonnier, G. (ed.)(2012). International Development Policy: Aid, Emerging Economies and Global Policies. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan

4.?????Dany, C. (2013). Global Governance and NGO Participation: Shaping the Information Society in the United Nations. New York: Routledge

5.?????Deacon, B. (2007). Global Social Policy and Governance. London: Sage

6.?????Florini, A.M. (ed.) (2000). The Third Force: The Rise of Transnational Civil Society. Maryland: Carnegie

7.?????Hugue, A. S. and Zafarullah, H. (eds.). (2006). International Development Governance. New York: CRS Press

8.?????Jackson, R. and Sorensen, G. (2010, 4thedi.) Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches. New York: Oxford University Press.

9.?????Leonard, E.K. (2005). The Onset of Global Governance: International Relations Theory and the International Criminal Court. Hampshire: Ashgate Publishing Limited.

10.?Lindblom, A. (2005). Non-Governmental Organizations in International Law.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

11.?Nayyar, D. (ed.).(2002). Governing Globalization: Issues and Institutions. New York: Oxford University Press

12.?Scholte, J.A.(2005, 2ndedi.). Globalization: A Critical Introduction. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan

13.?Sinclair, T.J. (2012). Global Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press

14.?Steffek, J. (2010). Public Accountability and the Public Sphere of International Governance, Ethics and International Affairs. In Lang, S. (ed.).NGOs, Civil Society and the Public Sphere (2013). New York: Cambridge University Press

15.?Steger, M.B. (2013, 3rdedi.). Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. London: Oxford University Press

16.?United Nations (2016, October 24). Global goals can “propel us towards a better future for all on a healthy planet” Retrieved from http: //www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/secretary-general

17.?Vedder, A. (ed.). (2007). NGO Involvement in International Governance and Policy: Sources of Legitimacy. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff

18.?Vos, R. and Montes, M.F. (eds.). (2013). Retooling Global Development and Governance. London: Bloomsbury Publishing

19.?Walker, J.W. St G. and Thompson, A.S.(eds.).(2008). Critical Mass: The Emergence of Global Civil Society. Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press

20.?Weiss, T.G.(2016). Governing the World? Addressing “Problems Without Passports”. New York: Routledge

21.?Willetts, P. (2011). Non-Governmental Organizations in World Politics: The Construction of Global Governance. New York: Routledge

22.?Williams, D. (2012). International Development and Global Politics: History, Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge

?

Article Authored By: Kennedy Osei-Tutu

International NGOs Specialist

·????????Ph.D. in View with 5 Admissions in Europe since 2012 Applying ( Gained admissions to City Univ of London; Essex Univ; Univ of Amsterdam; Loughborough Univ & Univ of Minho).

·????????M.A. in International NGOs; Webster University USA in Leiden, Netherlands; 2011

·????????B.A. in Psychology with Sociology; University of Ghana in Legon, Accra-Ghana; 2004

·????????2010 Recipient of the prestigious Netherlands Fellowship Programme Award (NFP: An International Scholarship Award from Netherlands Government through the Ghana Government)

·????????Address: Israel, Accra, Ghana-West Africa

·????????Mobile No.: +233504970260.????????

·????????Social Media: Facebook/LinkedIn/Twitter/Instagram/Skype/Youtube: ???????????????????????????Kennedy Osei-Tutu (Kofi Rawlings)??????

·????????E-mails: KKOseitutu@gmail.com/KKOseitutu@yahoo.com???????????????????????????????????????????????????

?

[1]The word indispensable is used here to mean that GCS makes indelible impact on the global governance

system such that global governance cannot function successfully without their involvement/participation