First, the interaction between globalization and anti-globalization. Globalization is the leading trend of the development of human society, and economic globalization is one of the most important manifestations. In recent years, the "Black Swan Incident" such as Britain's withdrawal from the European Union, Trump's election as President of the United States and Trump's explicit expression of protectionist tendencies have made people question the trend of globalization.
Although the voice of questioning globalization will always appear in many historical cycle nodes, we should objectively and fairly reflect on the instrumental attributes of globalization while criticizing globalization. This anti-globalization trend of thought has caused many uncertainties. It is worth mentioning that in history, it is often the weak who stand up and call for vigilance against globalization. However, this time, some traditional developed economies that have traditionally led globalization, provided global public goods and guided the direction of global governance began to take the lead in questioning globalization.
Second, developed countries have insufficient motivation to provide public goods. In fact, developed countries are not opposed to globalization, but are exploring what kind of globalization is more conducive to realizing their own interests. In a sense, they are rethinking how to participate in globalization, to what extent they provide public goods and participate in global governance in order to maximize their own interests.
Therefore, under the background of globalization and anti-globalization, the motivation of traditional public goods suppliers to provide public goods is relatively weakened, because they have begun to care about gains and losses. Taking the field of global economic governance as an example, the pressure of global economic growth and development is still great, and the demand for public goods is huge. Developed countries have slow economic recovery and many domestic problems, and are not interested in providing global public goods; However, the contribution of emerging economies is increasing, but they do not enjoy the symmetrical right to speak internationally.
Third, there is uncertainty in the comparison between the external world policy environment and international power. The trend of national policies in major developed economies is unclear: it is difficult to predict the possible spillover effects of American economic policies on a global scale, and it is difficult to judge the impact effects of European changes. In addition, the comparison of power in various problem areas is not clear.
The pattern of power contrast between major countries or economies will directly affect the distribution of power in major issue areas and have a decisive impact on governance results. For example, in the monetary field, the diversification pattern of the international currency basket is uncertain. Once the euro falls, does it mean that the internationalization of RMB is slow, while the US dollar is dominant and the negative spillover effect continues? Or, the euro has stabilized, the internationalization of RMB is progressing smoothly, the dollar is strong, and the influence of the euro and RMB is gradually increasing?
In the field of trade, the trend of fragmentation of rules continues, and bilateral and multilateral rules play a role in parallel. How to determine the interests in this round of fragmentation of rules dominated by developed economies and how to seek the continuation of trade facilitation advantages is still a major challenge before us. As major stakeholders, big countries need to participate in providing global public goods such as inclusive rules.
In the field of investment, developed economies such as the United States and Europe deliberately create obstacles. The investment risks of underdeveloped economies and underdeveloped economies remind us that the institutional obstacles affecting investment facilitation are very serious and urgently need global consensus, rules and sufficient public goods to deal with them. In the field of climate change, with the withdrawal of the United States, can the results of the Paris climate agreement be maintained?
Fourth, there is a rule vacuum in the new problem area. In some emerging and non-traditional security fields, such as cyberspace, there are rules vacuum, lack of public goods and governance deficit in the governance of global commons. In many traditional problem areas, governance has laws to follow, but these emerging problem areas lack recognized, mature and referential laws, regulations or rules. On the one hand, this state of no law to follow and no rules to follow shows the current situation of public goods deficit, on the other hand, it also means that the problem of non-neutral system is easy to appear in the soil of freedom of action.
The threshold of discourse power in these fields is very high. In terms of rule shaping, developed countries have innate advantages that developing countries cannot surpass, so it is easy to dominate rule shaping again, and they can enjoy the "first-Mover advantage" of institutional neutrality without providing a large number of public goods. The so-called high threshold mainly refers to advanced technology, research and development capabilities and strong financial support. On a global scale, only a few big countries, especially the major developed economies, can afford it, and they have more experience in rulemaking to follow.
Regular vacuum makes it easier for the system to remain neutral. Of course, the emergence of new problem areas also means more flexibility, freedom and participation opportunities. It also means that the "cost-benefit ratio" of participating in governance and sharing public goods is not clear, and it is difficult to convince countries to participate in public goods financing. Member States are more inclined to wait and see, or just want to "hitchhike".
Basic characteristics of an ideal global governance mechanism
First, closely follow the theme of the times, formulate crisis early warning and prevention, and deal with the increasing uncertainty of the world. In the new era, the non-traditional nature of security issues is increasing. For example, the explosions in Brussels, London and Paris have aroused great vigilance both inside and outside the region. Europe is facing many problems, such as the imbalance of domestic economic and social development, the further shortage of jobs caused by immigration, the integration of immigrants and the distinction between ordinary immigrants and terrorism. The solution of these problems is not a short-term event, and a long-term mechanism should be formulated to start with economic and social development. In addition, to solve these problems, countries need to share information and formulate and improve crisis early warning and prevention mechanisms.
Second, win-win cooperation and inclusive progress. Ensure that all kinds of members are generally willing to participate, and their interests can be fully expressed and guaranteed. The basic nature of various global problems determines that only countries and Qi Xin can work together and cooperate in governance, so as to effectively deal with them. There are conflicts and cooperation between countries; There are differences and consensus; There are differences of interest and common interests. Only by abandoning conflicts and seeking common ground while reserving differences can we achieve a win-win situation.
Third, adhere to the basic principles of universal participation and full supervision. The so-called universal participation and supervision fully discussed the legitimacy and effectiveness of global governance. Global governance is multilateral cooperation. It needs to adhere to certain principles, supplemented by appropriate restraint means (such as sanctions), safeguard the effectiveness and legitimacy of multilateral cooperation, ensure that rules are observed, resolutions are implemented, power is regulated and restricted, and breach of contract is punished.