Filling the Gaps

The world has a governance problem. We need more of it—at a time when we have less of it. Globalization has created gaps between the problems we face and our ability to respond. The problems move quickly, but our institutions do not. Problems like the meltdown of the global financial system and global climate change cross borders and require urgent and coordinated action across countries. But governance stops at the borders of our primary institutions, sovereign states.

New forms of governance are emerging to fill the gaps, especially in the private sector, sometimes in public-private partnerships, sometimes alone. Civil society combines in transnational networks to change corporate and government behavior on issues from debt relief to land mines. Nongovernmental organizations and private companies provide services previously deemed the purview of states—from building roads to providing security. Civil society and companies develop and hold businesses accountable to corporate social responsibility codes. A private regulatory body governs the Internet, to the extent that anyone does that.


The public sector also attempts to increase capacity and collaboration across borders. We create new international institutions (the World Trade Organization) and adapt old ones (NATO and the United Nations). Religious actors are part of the mix as well.

But all these efforts are still not enough. People are dying, but states cannot save them. The United States and other strong states cannot solve these problems alone; their institutions are not wired for it. Nearly a third of the people on earth live in the weakest states in the system, as described in detail in The Failed State Index, a new report by the Fund for Peace. Their citizens are the most vulnerable, yet these states are the least able to respond to the challenges of globalization and some deny their people the ability to participate in or hold their governments accountable for the activities undertaken in their name. The worst of these states are predatory, deliberately killing the very citizens they are supposed to protect.

Sovereignty—the ideas that governance aligns with territory and that those outside the geographic boundaries have no authority to meddle in internal affairs—is problematic for most of the people on the planet. But most leaders and scholars ignore the problem of sovereignty in world politics, focusing on government action even as states are less able to resolve global problems alone.

I am not a neutral observer of these issues. I had recently finished the fourth edition of my book on globalization, Beyond Sovereignty: Issues for a Global Agenda, when Pope Benedict XVI released his encyclical Caritas in Veritate. The pope reveals himself to be an institutional pragmatist. When the challenges are as urgent as they now are, we have to use all available tools and work through, reform, strengthen, expand and improve many institutions. States, existing and new international institutions, civil society partnerships, more ethically oriented businesses, churches and individuals—all have a role, and no one is off the hook.

Media controversy focused on No. 67, “the urgent need of a true world political authority…universally recognized and vested with the effective power to ensure security for all, regard for justice, and respect for rights.”

Few noted No. 41, which urges us “to promote a dispersed political authority, effective on different levels,” and No. 57, which notes that “the governance of globalization must be marked by subsidiarity, articulated into several layers and involving different levels that can work together. Globalization certainly requires authority, insofar as it poses the problem of a global common good that needs to be pursued. This authority, however, must be organized in a subsidiary and stratified way.” Pope Benedict calls for effective international institutions, as did his predecessors, but he also calls for updating and making all our institutions more ethical and effective.

The pope calls for neither one world government nor untrammeled sovereign autonomy, but for effective global governance. Institutional pluralism carries costs, including overlapping jurisdictions and coordination difficulties. But these institutions already exist, and so can be more quickly reformed to serve better the needs of the world’s most vulnerable.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
9 years 2 months ago

Dr. Cusimano Love is correct in her analysis of international governance. Two issues spring to mind. The first is the need for more "international sovereignty."  Sovereignty in the modern era comes from election by the people, so in order to create transnational sovereign bodies, they must incorporate en electoral component.  Internationally, this would seem to be impossible, since much of the world - indeed where the most vulnerable are exploited - does not share the values required to form such a union.  The best we are likely to do is to form sovereign allied structures, in essence that would involve turning NATO into a part of the European Union and the United States and Canada joining in some capacity.  Such a Union could grow to include other democratic nations as well, provided they respect the natural rights of their citizens.  Such a body would not violate subsidiarity, since global issues should be handled by global organizations.  Subsidiarity must also be tempered by Solidarity, as cited in No. 58, particularly involved, but certainly not limited to, issues of international trade.

The second issue is the role of organized labor, which the Holy Father sites with regard to the  International Labour Organization in No. 63 and in his call in No. 64 for national unions to include in their scope of attention workers outside the membership, particularly workers in other countries.  This could be enhanced by more union ownership of multi-national corporations, which could then enroll overseas employees in the union movement and spread living wage reforms to them.  This would be the best way to ensure both subsidiarity and the spread of the political ideals which come with economic freedom that most workers on the world stage still sorely lack.  In time, this will aid the building of stronger allied and global governance structures, as more and more nations respect the rights of their workers and their poorest citizens.

9 years 2 months ago
You clarify what the Pope wroite about international governance.  Part of his  text on this point can easily be misleading, if read in isolation. 
I did write an extensive comment on your prior column, too late apparently to post and probably too long too. My subject: Is the corporate social responsibility movement a scam?  If you are interested in my thoughts you can find them on my blog, Human Rights for Workers, at
Bob Senser


The latest from america

The Adorers of the Blood of Christ have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether their religious freedom rights were violated by the construction and pending use of a natural gas pipeline through its land.
Throughout the discussions leading up to the synod's final week, small groups "have been very specific and intentional that we don't become too Western with our approach."
In a statement issued a few minutes after the broadcast of a story from Radio-Canada investigating sexual abuse allegedly committed by 10 Oblate missionaries in First Nation communities, the Quebec Assembly of Catholic Bishops told of their "indignation and shame" for the "terrible tragedy of
Central American migrants depart from Ciudad Hidalgo, Mexico, on Oct. 21. (AP Photo/Moises Castillo)
Many of the migrants in the caravan are fleeing Central America’s “Northern Triangle”—El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. These countries are beset by “the world’s highest murder rates, deaths linked to drug trafficking and organized crime and endemic poverty.”
J.D. Long-GarcíaOctober 23, 2018