Global Governance Is The Most Significant Undertaking Towards Political Collaboration

International trade is important and beneficial to business. However, international trade guides a safeguard of interests, specific business contract, defined law, forum of dispute settlement, and understanding of contract clauses. “A working knowledge of international law helps business owners and managers with global interests reduce risk and increase profits” (Melvin, 2011, P. 631). This enlightenment will address the international legal and ethical issues involved in international business transactions and compare such to domestic business operations.

WTO: World Trade Organization deals with the global trading rules between international governments. The overall rules must be predictable enough so that everyone involved isn’t dealing with chaotic sudden changes.

The World Trade Organization was formed on January 1, 1995 however; its trade system is almost 50 years older. Since 1948, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) had provided the rules for the system. The main purpose for the World Trade Organization is to offer a forum for negotiation of trade between member Governments. The bulk of these agreements came from the 1986-1994 Uruguay Round negotiations, as well as from the GATT. Currently, the WTO is host to a new set of negotiations under the “Doha Development Agenda” launched in 2001. At the center of the WTO, are the agreements reached between the majorities of the world’s trading nations. These documents provide legal guidelines (and rules) for international commerce and general business. These agreements are ultimately viewed as contracts, binding the participating governments to keeping their trade policies within agreed limits. The system’s overriding purpose is to help trade flow freely for the economic development and well being of participating governments and their countries.

Globalization is the process by which the markets of different countries become integrated due to the exchange of goods, services, technology, and capital. Globalization depends on social, economic, and political factors, and continuously alters the way that the world works. All the vital components of the evolving global, political, economic and social institutions being examined seem to constantly converge and to perpetually intertwine during the day to day administration of global affairs. Diplomacy is employed to keep a measured balance between conflict and cooperation. The global guarantees of international law are placed in sharp contrast to the grim reality of human rights on daily basis and policy is dictated by the scales of political power and the urgent priorities of economic necessity. To understand how the globe functioned in the past and how it wishes to function in the future, we must study each factor separately and observe its inevitable interactivity with the other factors that occur. It is important to note that none of the dynamics can be given greater weight in comparison to the other crucial instrumentalities.

Although global actors can sometimes have considerable power over states, the extent of this power ultimately depends on the relative power and influence of the state in question. Large developed states, such as the US, are extremely powerful compared to most other global actors and are not often influenced by their actions. However, small and undeveloped states are not always completely powerless. To determine whether states are indeed the most powerful global actors, we must look at the relative powers of trans-national corporations (TNCs), non-government organisations (NGOs) and some of the institutions of global governance.

One of the principal functions of financial oversight authorities in achieving a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system is to regulate and supervise various financial entities. But following the crisis of 2007, regulatory authorities in the whole world were engaged in a fundamental reconsideration of how they approach financial regulation and supervision. Performing these functions through micro- prudential regulation and supervision of banks, holding companies, their affiliates and other entities, including nonbank financial companies, proved to be insufficient to ensure and maintain financial stability of a country, union or the world as a whole.

The book also refers to the question on the last part of the book if there any existence of a common system between countries and also the author put her own agenda for the democratization of the global governance and proposes to already build the components of democracy and expand the list of players in the public debate in global politics. The book also referred to the reform approach where The book mention that reform is not possible if there is no clear and high voice calling for reforms in the first

The Commission on Global Governance (2005) defined global governance as “the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs; it is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken”. The perception management which mislead the people from the complexities of reality that the American government adopted in 1980’s, do not conform with the definition of global governance since it includes the individuals as an actor that has to be involved with the process of conflict resolution. Since global governance is synonymous to international organizations, this imply that it is the IOs responsibility to ensure that global governance is being adopted across the globe.

In regards to political globalization, it is seen as the growth of the political system on a global scale, in both complexity and size (Hutchings, 2010). Previously, it was thought that national governments were ultimately responsible for maintaining the stable political and economic security of their citizens, while also upholding their rights (Forum, 2017). Although this is still true, with globalization becoming such progressively common theme throughout the world, there are a lot of alterations to the idea that only national governments are responsible for such things (Forum, 2017). Political activity has increasingly begun to take place on a global scale, especially due to ecological and economic changes, as well

The World Trade Organization was developed in 1995 out of what was known as the Uruguay Round. Although GATT set rules they mostly dealt with issues just involving simple trade of goods and the distribution of tariffs. The WTO has a broader job than the GATT; “…it oversees multilateral agreements relating not just to good, but also to services, investment and intellectual property.” (Douglas Irwin, 186) The World Trade Organization is an independent organization and decisions are made out of consensus of the member countries involved, not from the World Trade Organization itself. When a country complains about another country and the way they run things that could affect their home country, the WTO must make a decision on what must be done. Once a ruling has been made the losing country must implement one of three strategies:

This goes to show that even the most powerful countries are also dependent international institutions and multilateral cooperation to gain more benefits that it could offer. There are some recent research on international institutions that questions legalism and law as well as their effectiveness with or without regards to political realm. Scholars, few of them, had assumptions about realism, thus, accepting that relevance of state power as well are arguing interests about world politics. Some theorists draw conclusions on the influence of international institutions while recognizing the preferences of states for private rights just avoiding full transparency. Since their states that are not really certain about their partners and had some trust issues in the past, multilateral cooperation has some functional hindrances. International institutions can counter this uncertainty by means of encouraging negotiations and transparency. Past issues can be regarded with more open analyzation while promoting honesty and preserving good relationship with one another. Thinking about the normative implications of globalization, focus on the maintenance of effective democratic approach in each society is one way of the establishing formal structures of international regimes. To be consistent with democratic values for multilateral cooperation, international organizations that are politically inclined must be accountable to all aspect of it failure or

At the same time, the regulators should be as transparent as possible and fully accountable. The accountability and transparency of the regulator will increase the credibility of the regulator and in-turn benefit the regulated entity. Types of Financial Regulation Financial regulation in a country can be done either by a single body called a single regulator or multiple bodies co-existing and working together or in a hierarchy of entities known as multiple regulators. A regulator whether single or multiple does not determine the economic standing of a country or its financial strength. Many developed countries of the world follow either the system of single regulation or multiple regulations. Often in times of economic crisis or financial boom in the country’s economy the government of the nation will review its regulatory system and choose to expand or close down some of its regulatory bodies.

Much of the recent commentary on the state of the multilateral trading system has focused on the lack of consensus among member states on how to reinvigorate the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) negotiating pillar (see, for example, Hoekman, 2012; Deere-Birkbeck, 2011). This is unsurprising given the travails of the Doha negotiations and the decision to set the round aside at the organisation’s 10th ministerial conference in Nairobi in December 2015. Yet, as WTO officials have been quick to remind us, behind the drama of Doha round, the non-negotiating aspects of the multilateral trading system have continued to function, and to do so well (see Azevêdo,

place institutions that support market liberalization and increased transparency. As argued by Drabek and Baccheta (2004), WTO membership eventually enhances good governance by upholding the rule law, contract enforcement and makes countries to have a strong judicial system. Other elements such as culture and group norms have fundamentally transformed how international organizations or governments shape their motivations and thus, the governing process is controlled by multiple entities with varying interest (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2015). If any country wants to be a part of the international community, they will have no choice but to conform to WTO’s stipulations and adapt to the ever evolving global system. Policy making and economic conditions in WTO member states have changed drastically over the last two decades because the two elements are heavily influenced by forces of globalization.

But with the expansion of a technological world where the world is a much smaller place, one must look at the role that global governance now plays, and one must ask, does global governance reduce the role of the nation state? But before that can be answered, one must look at the question, ‘what is global governance?