The concept of global governance has been an issue with multiple meanings that lasted decades. Experts assert that it is also a popular concept that has received different meanings from global practitioners, academics, political scientists, historians and writers. There has been worldwide support for good governance by these practitioners campaigning against bad governance, corruption and political violence. They have called for a more powerful international legal system that allows for the reign of global governance in all countries. This calls for a fundamental change in an era of “turbulence” in which societies have found themselves in.
The political scientists assumed that major international relations are determined by sovereign nation-states, including Ethiopia. They tended to refer to global governance as a “conceptual” reference point for their occupation with global politics. The level of this occupation at regional and sub-regional levels depends on the political, economic and social interactions among African countries as well as global powers having interests in the continent.
The analysis of African affairs by concerned experts usually includes various phenomena, such as global economic and social movements, civil society, and the activities of international organizations. These experts are also interested in the changing and variable capacity of African states, the role of the private sector, public-private networks and forms of the private sector.
The experts also follow up world politics in relation to global and regional governance. According to political scientists, “global” governance refers to more than the formal institutions and organizations in African countries, including Ethiopia. These institutions serve as a means of managing international affairs. The UN system and national governments are focal points for ensuring the conduct of global governance. They ensure that global governance includes systems of rules and regulations at all levels of human activity in all countries.
The global institutions create an enabling environment for the pursuit of the goal of global governance. This is done through exercising controls that have global repercussions. The goal focuses on systems of rule and free human activity with global effects. Systems of rule exist where instruments are in place to address expectations of the people of the world. Experts explain that systems of rule “at all levels of human activity” include local, regional, national, international, and transnational control mechanisms.
The system of rule stipulates that interactions should be considered in line with global governance. These interactions should be “intentional,” relating to the individual or collective goals. Non-intentional processes are largely excluded from the global governance. In practice, a distinction between intentional and non-intentional processes may be problematic in many cases. The processes such as social learning may also be considered elements of global governance. Effort has been made to show the scientific approaches to explain global governance.
After changes of governments in Africa, experts have observed renewed efforts by the new leaders to engage global institutions. These institutions focused on private business entities as productive enterprises that enhance global governance. These are the WB, IMF, AfDB, EU, etc and related institutions. For these institutions, the concept of global governance describes a specific set of observable and related activity. The use of this term can be understood as an answer to the failures of existing concepts of global relations.
As world politics is rapidly changing, Africa, including Ethiopia, has to adjust its conceptual framework on global governance. They have to analyze how authority is exercised in a decentralized political authority. In other words, there is a need to elaborate on the evolution of global governance. Global governance can be traced to a growing dissatisfaction among students of international politics with liberal-institutions.
The old realities are no longer seen as appropriate for the young generation that replaced “international politics” with the new label of “global governance.” Global governance is also closely related to globalization due to advancement of new tech. Also, the deepening economic globalization and increasing migration, trade and capital flows and climate change are not limited to one country.
However, policies adopted to address these issues are not confined to a single country, as they are global in their nature. Global factors aggravate the need for global governance, which relies on the ability to integrate world economic and political issues. There is a debate on the negative effects of globalization, including increased financial crises, rising global inequalities, cyclical crises, and the reduction of smaller economies, such as the Ethiopian economy, into passive recipients of harmful global policies. These policies reduce recipients into dependents on alms and food aid from Western countries.
The developing countries are subjected to lower economic growth and development by alien policies of subjugation. African resources are being depleted by the superpowers seeking to grab the natural resources of Africa, including Ethiopia. These countries are subjected to poverty, unemployment, and powerlessness due to failure to adapt modern technology for the advancement of their economy.
On the other hand, globalization has fostered increased coherence, coordination and collective decision-making at the global level based on global human rights standards. This is guided by the commitment of the global community to the protection of human rights. It is reflected in the UN, EU, AU, etc., framework of cooperation. But government policies and international arrangements for collective decision-making have not kept pace with these changes. The changing nature of the global economy, the global political system and non-state actors has given fresh momentum and force to global governance.
Experts suggest that the global governance can be observed using various approaches. Governance regulations have been observed shifting from the global to national policy levels. The extension of governance authority beyond the national level has caused diffusion of authority.
Governance regulations and policies at national levels required huge resources for effective and efficient application of authority. African countries, including Ethiopia, have designed good governance modalities and regulations that are based on the social and cultural practices of the people. Also, they devise the means for understanding how these regulations function. To enhance such understanding they relate the good governance in any African country with reference to its economy, finance, health, education, security, employment, migration, and other social and economic factors. These areas have also been traditionally affected by the division of the world into developed and developing countries or the North–South divisions. The “Global South” views governance as dominated by the North.
Political scientists observe that the countries in the global south are often splitting along different interests. Also, institutions in the area of governance are being challenged, sometimes directly or indirectly by alternative regional and sub-regional systems. New strategic choices for developing countries are emerging in each area. This causes Africa, including Ethiopia, to carve its role in the emerging global order.
In this endeavor, the AU became a member of the G20, just weeks after the BRICS association welcomed Egypt and Ethiopia as new members, alongside Saudi Arabia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Argentina. Both events revealed Africa’s strategic position. This positioning of AU and BRICS has its implications for global governance, with its effects on the state of affairs in Africa, including Ethiopia. African states, individually or collectively, have become more assertive in defending their interests. They also demanded for fairer representation in global and multilateral institutions.
Africa is increasingly becoming a strategic partner with global powers, forcing them to reconsider their earlier positions. Most of these global powers are revisiting their partnership strategies with Africa. Consequently, the number of African high-level official visits to the developed countries has increased in recent years. Experts believe that Africa’s new global role changes the power dynamic between it and its partners. As a result, Africa, including Ethiopia, will alter the politics, principles and procedures of global governance.
Africa’s growing global importance has largely been shown through its geopolitical competition. This is often based on challenging the growing influence of the superpowers that attracts African countries, including Ethiopia, to do business with them. This reflects the changing global strategy needed for dealing with the continent. Africa’s global significance partly emanates from its natural resources that attracted the superpowers. They badly need these resources for their industrial sectors.
Africa’s recognition as a strategic partner is driven by domestic factors such as economic and population growth, assertive political leadership and a “young digitized” population. The African youth is in a position to challenge archaic narratives about the continent. Also, the changing global geopolitical context, the need for alliances and the rush for critical minerals have enhanced Africa’s global significance.
In this regard, Ethiopia has immense natural resources that have not yet been exploited. It has a fast growing economy and a young population, with a growing middle class and a high urbanization rate. This human resource can be a potential driver of growth and prosperity in Ethiopia if peace and security is allowed to reign within its domain.
The lack of peace and security is driven by alien powers that are inimical, opposed and adverse to the growth and development of the country. These powers want to exploit the resources of the country by keeping Ethiopians in ethnic and tribal conflicts. They engage in non-economic warfare and skirmishes that keep the people dependent of foreign aid and alms.
BY GETACHEW MINAS
THE ETHIOPIAN HERALD SATURDAY 29 MARCH 2025
