The essentials
As international organisations take decisions that affect billions of people, a key question arises: to whom are they accountable, and how democratic are they? Global governance refers to the network of institutions, rules and practices through which states and other actors manage common problems.
Different organisations follow different decision-making rules. In the UN General Assembly each state has one vote, which gives small and large states equal formal weight. In the Security Council, five permanent members hold a veto. In the IMF and the World Bank, voting is weighted by financial contribution, so the richer countries have a larger say. The WTO usually works by consensus, but some argue that powerful trading states have more influence in shaping its agenda.
Key points
- Supporters of reform argue that institutions should reflect today's distribution of population and economic power, not that of the 1940s.
- Demands for greater transparency, more participation by developing countries, and better representation of different regions are common in reform debates.
- Others point out that those who contribute most may expect a greater say, and that efficiency can suffer if decision-making becomes too slow.
- NGOs and civil society groups try to make international institutions more accountable by monitoring their work and raising public awareness.
- International organisations remain dependent on the cooperation of member states; they cannot easily act against the wishes of powerful members.
Exam tips
Compare the voting systems of the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Bretton Woods institutions. Write balanced answers that set out arguments on both sides of the reform debate.
Common mistakes
- Assuming all international organisations use one-country-one-vote. Decision rules vary from body to body.