Readers' Guide Comment on “United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), WTO trade and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) renewal negotiations”
WEF argues that its new governance approach can resolve nuclear proliferation, trade conflicts, and climate change discord without governmental agreements. All three areas encompass core elements of traditional state functions -- military security, economic growth, and risk management. Additionally, all of the cited negotiations are ones in which the OECD countries have significant differences between themselves, not to mention a disinclination to address concerns of non-nuclear states, least developed exporters, or low lying countries. The GRI makes this major recommendation for multi-stakeholder governance without presenting any evidence that a more effective or more legitimate outcome would result.
As a starting point, WEF could have provided an indication of what configuration of governing Actors could solve non-proliferation, establish a Doha development trade regime, or mitigate CO2E emissions in a more effective and legitimate manner than the traditional, intergovernmental negotiation process, as difficult as this is. WEF’s case would be stronger if the Davos meeting following the release of Everyone’s Business had produced a solution that the rest of the Davos participants would commit to implement in order to address even one of these global challenges.
The Readers' Guide welcomes comments with alternative examples or counter examples, supplemental assessments of the extracted GRI text or commentary – critical or otherwise – of the above interpretation of GRI’s perspective.