COMPLEXITY. Wars, diseases and major ecological collapses have existed as long as there has been human life on Earth. Humans have been heavily afflicted by such problems, but we have always risen from ashes. But imagine if, despite that the risks are low, a global catastrophe takes place without humanity being able to recover? In order to avoid global disasters, the world community has to find new methods for cooperation. Could a multistakeholder model be one of the solutions? 

Jens Orback is the Executive of the Global Challenges Foundation

Traditional risk analysis is based on the following equation: the size of a risk is the potential future damage multiplied by the probability that the damage would occur. The equation clearly shows that when the potential damage of risk is large, we cannot ignore it because of insecurity or because the probability för the damage taking place seems low.

Global catastrophes have occurred before in history, as some previous pandemics have killed more than 10% of the world’s population. During the 20th century, a nuclear war was close on several occasions, a risk that has not changed despite it is more seldomly being discussed in public debate. The most dramatic change is that humanity, for the first time in history, is capable of seriously damaging the global ecosystem that we are all depending on. ser

Covid-19, greenhouse gas emissions, and weapons of mass destruction have one thing in common – they are not limited to national borders. It is becoming obvious that threats against humanity are border-crossing. Regardless if it is about global health, climate, environmental damages or connected migration flows. 

Since earlier, humanity has tried to create institutions at different levels to handle those crises and conflicts of interests that affect us. However, the capacity to address serious border-crossing threats through common decision-making and regulations is defective at the moment. 

Humanity stands in front of great opportunities and challenges in reforms, economic development, and technological innovation to handle global catastrophic risks like climate change, weapons of mass destruction, or pandemics. Everyone can benefit from a common policy, but all stakeholders do not equally interpret the benefits to themselves as being large or are unwilling to finance the costs. In such situations, everyone is affected by the problem. 

The term “global governance” includes a lot of the “soft power” that the world community needs, by the power of attraction resulting in more stakeholders committing themselves to a norm rather than by imposing coercion, cowing to brute force or economic compensation. True supranationalism between governments and international organisations is still rare. Most of today’s multilateral institutions were built up after the Second World War, but they were not designed for the purpose of dealing with the threats we face today.

This is why we now see organisations like the World Health Organisation (WHO) lacking the power to sanction countries that do not follow the encouragement to analyse and report their health capacities to handle diseases spreading. World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations are at a standstill. Member countries are instead working on bilateral or regional multilateral agreements. United Nations (UN) organs are dependent for their functions on the member-states earmarked contributions, leading to distortions in their activities.

The European Union (EU), the world’s most advanced project for political integration, is a regional organisation and member-state governments decide the union’s direction. Global problems demand global solutions, but we must understand which solutions are efficient and workable. Reforms of the UN have been discussed, but have so far not gone forward because great powers are tending to their short-term national interests, and thereby it is hard to conduct reforms from above. 

Multi-party stakeholder models approach global challenges by gathering representatives for different governmental and non-governmental organisations that affect or are affected by a common issue or problem. Global interest initiatives gather together companies, civil society organisations, politics, public institutions and projects. Also, such processes can also include academic institutions, foundations, intergovernmental organisations as well as technical expertise. 

Some multi-party stakeholders include only the non-governmental sector, in contrast to multilateralism, where the governments are meeting for negotiations. Some researchers that have analysed the topic of multi-stakeholder conversations argue that this model provides a stronger engagement and mobilises more resources from participants than traditional multilateral institutions. Also, stakeholders represent their functions, rather than their nations, which provide a more pragmatic attitude in the negotiations. 

Such developments were in general seen as unthinkable 20-30 years ago, so can a shift to multistakeholderism be legitimate and efficient? To whom are such stakeholders responsible and how? Is there a risk that they are being dominated by special interests and can increase inequality in the world? 

We do not know the answers to these questions yet and we need to examine them further in order to find a road map. Not only in order to recover our world to the conditions before Covid-19 but also in order to imagine a less fragile future. 

The post Global challenges demand global multistakeholder solutions first appeared on Opulens.

IDENTIFICATION. Around the world, almost every fifth human lacks a legal identification document. Lacking official identification means worse possibilities for the individual’s economic and social development, something that primarily is harder when it comes to women and children. This is one reason why the UN 2030 Agenda is essential. With its 17 goals, also when it comes to issues of human identification. The agenda offers opportunities where none human in the future should be illegal or stateless.

Today, one of the most infringed human rights is the right to have and change nationality (citizenship). After the Millennium goals of the 2000’s, the next step regarding global development and governance is the UN:s Agenda 2030 based on the sustainable development goals — SDG:s. The SDG number 16 is about peace, justice and institutions. Also, it takes up topics regarding migration and identification. Part of the goal is that every human should have access to a legal ID in the form of ID-documents and constitutional rights.

One can wonder why such goals are required today? In principle, all UN member states have access to modern bureaucratic systems. However, regardless of all advanced technology as biometric passports and electronic confirmation systems, enormous challenges are remaining when it comes to human identification. The fact is that we are living in a world there around 1,5 billion individuals, or almost every fifth human on our planet lacks a valid ID for vital needs.

Lack of ID is especially making it harder for women and girls as in West Africa, in countries as Liberia and Ivory Coast, and in refugees camps. One reason why women, more often than men, face tough life situations is that women more often lack ID cards, proof of birth and marriage certificates. The case is often even harder in refugee camps when women can require access to financial donations, education and primary health care.

According to the World Bank, the lack of ID-documentation makes it harder for women to exercise their potential and opportunities in everyday life. Such situations when women are lacking ID-documentation makes it also harder for civic participation. Levels of gender equality in global sense are going to be lower as long as less number of women, comparing to the number of men, can practice their relations with public institutions, to practice their social rights and conduct economic self-development.

At the same time, there are efficient solutions in the forms of digital identification. One example is the Aadhaar card in India which resulted in the majority of India’s population, even the poorest have, have more comfortable possibilities to identify themselves. The Aadhaar card is based on biometric identifying with the help of microchips containing the information about the individual.

A similar system that was introduced in the neighbouring country of Pakistan resulted in 40 million women being able to give new ID-documentations at the start of the 2010s. Beside more natural processes with cash transfers and conducting relations with public institutions, it also led to more feelings of self-determination and self-confidence among many women that before never or more seldom took the opportunity vote and to organise projects.

Digital ID:s have also been proven as efficient to reduce fraud and abuse of power, and also to make it easier for democratic participation and inclusion.

In Estonia, all citizens have the Internet as a civic right. It means that the state has to provide all citizens with access to the Internet, as via public libraries, and where all citizens can e-vote (electronically) in elections.

In Nigeria, around 4300 thousand “ghost workers” disappeared from the public bureaucracy after the biometric ID-system was introduced and replace the earlier paper-based methods.

Also, such development is seen by the World Bank as good from the climate-friendly perspective such digital IDs lead to reduced usage of paper and working intensity.

A next important step in identity development has its potential in usage of the Self-Sovereign Identity or SSI. One main difference compared to the publicly issued identification, as by the state governments, is that SSI is based on the individual as a sovereign actor.

SSI is based on the blockchain function for transactions where the information is stored in a “block” that can be connected in several blocks and thereby produce a blockchain. During transition, the blocks are interacting and supporting each others security regarding the password combinations, which makes the system more secure from hacking and attacks. Also, the blockchain makes it easier for direct interactions between the individuals because a blockchain system does not demand “middle hands” and centralised based driven by private or public institutions like banks and ministries.

An essential thought behind the SSI is that the induvial does not have to hold different IDs, ass passports and health cards, for different occasions. Thanks to the SSI technology, all physical passport systems could be replaced by such digital solutions.

Last but not least, the main powerfulness and vitality of the SSI idea is that every individual has sovereignty and owns its identification. While a global citizenship in judicial meaning is still not existing, it could be established in the future on human’s fundamental freedoms, rights and sovereignty. At least, via global SSI, not human would need to be stateless or undocumented. If every induvial could own identification in a global sense, it would also make it easier for humans to migrate for self-development or potation in a more free and secure way.

The post Self-Sovereign Identity as global citizenship first appeared on Opulens.