Governing the World

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/bl.30033
• Published date: 01 November 2015
• Date: 01 November 2015
• Author: Caroline Oliver

NOV.–DEC. 2015 5

Governing the World

Board Leadership Editor Caroline Oliver interviews Otto Spijkers, Assistant

Professor of Public International Law at Utrecht University and researcher at the

Utrecht Centre for Water, Oceans and Sustainability Law.

Caroline: I recently came across

your article “What’s Running the

World: Global Values, World Law, the

United Nations and Global Gover-

nance,1 and I know you have taught

in a variety of national and interna-

tional settings. I am delighted that

you have kindly given me the oppor-

tunity to ask you a lot of questions

about this immense subject. My first

question is what does global gover-

nance mean in theory?

Otto: I think it is useful to use

the term global governance as ref-

erence to a more realistic and less

threatening form of organization at

the global level than “global govern-

ment.” Global governance refers to

coordinated action of various entities

operating at the global level—nation-

states, international organizations,

corporations, nongovernmental

organizations, peoples, individuals—

driven by shared goals and values,

without reliance on a global police

force or any other form of compul-

sory compliance mechanism.

What drives global governance

is thus a voluntary commitment to

certain shared goals and values, and

not powerful institutions that can

impose their will on recalcitrant ele-

ments in the global community. Such

a system of loose global networks,

kept together only by shared goals,

of course, has its weaknesses. When

important entities refuse to join, it is

impossible to force them to change

their mind. All we have is soft forms

of persuasion. I think it is good to

accept this as a given, and not expect

the so-called “powerful” players—the

UN Security Council, the USA, Russia,

the European Union, etc.—to try to

force recalcitrant entities to join the

consensus.

Board Leadership’s mission is

“to discover, explain, and

discuss innovative approaches to

board governance with the goal

of helping organizations achieve

effective, meaningful, and suc-

cessful leadership to fulfill their

missions.”

Board Leadership aims to ful-

fill this mission by engaging its

readers in a lively and illuminating

inquiry into how board gover-

nance can be made more effec-

tive. This inquiry is based on three

key assumptions:

• Boards exist to lead

organizations; not merely

monitor them.

• Effective board governance

is not about either systems,

structures, processes,

theories, practices, culture, or

behaviors—it is about all of

them.

• Significant improvements are

likely to come only through

challenging the status quo

and trying out new ideas in

theory and in practice.

Uniquely among regular pub-

lications on board governance,

Board Leadership primarily

focuses on the job of board lead-

ership as a whole, rather than on

individual elements of practice

within the overall job.

Over time, Board Leadership

will provide a repository of dif-

ferent approaches to governance

created through its regular “One

Way to Govern” feature.

Here’s what a few of the key

terms we use mean to us:

• Innovative: Creating

significant positive change.

• Approaches to:

principles, theories, ideas,

methodologies, and practices.

• Board governance: The

job of governing whole

organizations.

WHEN WE SAY ...

Caroline: To what extent does

global governance exist in practice?

Is it becoming more or less real?

Otto: When global governance

is defined in such cautious terms as

I have just done, it is very real. It is,

I believe, an accurate description of

the world of international relations.

Global governance is a fact of life. It is

an unstoppable phenomenon, which

I believe is a good thing. Whenever

people interact frequently, a body of

shared values emerges because people

feel the need to explain their behav-

ior in a moral language that all other

members of the group understand. If

the group we have to answer to is no

longer the state but the international

community, we need to develop a

common language that everyone can

understand. I think international law

provides that common language.

Caroline: Is it being seen as more

or less desirable than before and by

whom?

What drives global

governance is thus a

voluntary commitment

to certain shared goals

and values, and not

powerful institutions that

can impose their will on

recalcitrant elements in

the global community.

(continued on page 6)