sharing power with the next generations

After the horrific destruction in two world wars in the 20th century – the other ending with a scintillating display of scientific progress and Thousands of innocent civilians destroyed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki – The victors of the wars vow “never again”. A new breed of global institutions were created to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction, rebuild shattered economies, and maintain global peace. These were the headquarters of the United Nations in New York and the Bretton Woods Institute – the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – in Washington. Power in these institutions was retained by the victors: in the five-member Security Council at the United Nations, and by the United States and Europe at the World Bank and IMF who make their appointments at the top. The United Nations General Assembly is democratic in principle. But the real power of guns and money lies in the control of the Security Council and Washington institutions. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is back in the picture to maintain the center of gravity of the global force in the west.

a fresh concept

The power struggle in and around Ukraine has intensified, camouflaged as an ideological war between democracies and dictators. All countries are expected to declare which side they are on. Institutions of global governance that were supposed to guarantee peace have failed. Clearly, global governance requires new ideas. A new concept of “inter-generational justice” is gaining traction as a better way to build a more equitable global order and, hopefully, prevent the catastrophic destruction of mankind despite – or because of? – Great progress in technologies.

The answer to the rhetorical question – what kind of world do we want to leave for our grandchildren – is to ask them what kind of world they want to live in. The older generation listens to the younger generation, not the younger people follow their elders, maybe a revolutionary civilizational change. However, the elders listening to the youth will not be enough. The youth should also be given the charge of creating the world they want to live in. They cannot leave solutions to the older generation whose ways of working have caused these global problems. The problem is that if young people follow the same old methods that are taught in universities and also learn where they work, they will make global problems worse.

Time is Running Out

The modern approach to progress, widely disseminated through “STEM” (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education, is to extract resources from the planet to create new products for human benefit. And then to find new technological approaches to repair the damage done to the planet by those technologies. Thus, scientific technology moves in circles. Every round, the owners of technologies get richer. Those suffering losses from the continued growth of economies are advised to be patient until the size of the pie produced is large enough to share with them. Time is Running Out. The weather is getting hot. Inequalities are increasing. People are losing their patience. New ways have to be found to solve complex global problems.

a new theory of change

The prevailing scientific theory of change is both “outside to inside” and “top to bottom”. Scientific experts try to be “objective” about the systems they study by keeping their minds out of the way. From their perceived purpose perks, they attempt to map the shape of the system separately. Like engineers, they look for levers within the system that they can pull to improve efficiency and increase output. However, this method may not work in socio-ecological systems. Because, in them, unlike machines designed by engineers, social scientists and economists are located within the systems they want to see objectively. Unlike ‘scientific’ design thinkers, who attempt to ‘objectively’ design systems, natural systems thinkers learn to live with and within the systems that give them life. After spoiling it, they no longer feel the need for rockets to take them to other planets.

The global approach to governance is also “from the outside” and “top to bottom”. Many disciplines must be brought together to understand the social, economic and physical aspects of complex issues such as climate change. Furthermore, stakeholders with conflicting needs should be aligned. Therefore, central coordination seems necessary for large-scale change. It is the standard model of a hierarchical organization, which is also applied in the corporate sector, national governments and international development organizations.

The problem is that this is the wrong way to solve complex global problems. Because experts, far from the various ways in which these complex problems manifest themselves on the ground, are largely not equipped to find effective solutions for the consequences. Since standard, “one size”, solutions may not fit all, not only do their solutions not work well but trust also breaks down between large international organizations (and the experts advising them) and the people on the ground. Is. This is a major cause of the rise of populism and rebellion against the “establishment” of the ideas and institutions that govern the world.

A new configuration, the G7, was created in the 1970s when the Bretton Woods Institute seemed unable to avert the global economic crisis due to the major “oil shock”. The United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan and Italy formed the G6. Canada, and later the European Union, joined later. Russia was later invited (G8) when the Soviet Union collapsed and was swiftly removed in the Crimean War (2014). China, now the world’s second largest economy, was never included. The G7 was expanded to the G20 in the 1990s, when China, Russia, India, Indonesia and other large economies were added. And now the G20 is cracking as the G7 seeks to oust Russia. India to chair G20 this year And try to keep the group together.

Power must be transferred between generations to create a more equitable global order. Less than 10% of the world’s citizens, and less than 6% of the world’s children under the age of 10, are in the G7. Power within economies must be transferred from the older persons to the younger ones. Globally, it must move from older, so-called ‘advanced’ countries to younger ’emerging’ economies. The G7 and the Security Council should invite the rest to find new solutions to global problems.

recycle this knowledge

Inter-generational dialogue is essential. Although all countries are aging, economies do not bear the burden of isolating older persons. Already the number of older persons in the world outweighs the number of children under the age of five, and will soon exceed the number below 10. Older people are humanity’s fastest growing yet least used resource. While power must be transferred to younger generations and emerging economies, all generations and countries must work together. All are stages of a larger process of development. One should listen to the aspirations of others and understand the wisdom of others. Emerging economies under colonial legacy should not be treated with arrogance as a ‘white man’s burden’ that could be rectified by a more advanced West. Many native communities have not yet lost their knowledge of living within natural systems and living as families and communities. This kind of knowledge on the ground needs to be cycled above to save the world for everyone.

List of United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 17 Complex global problems. They appear in different forms everywhere in the world. Centrally managed organizations cannot solve such problems. Local systems solutions, which are implemented together by older and younger individuals within their communities, are the way to solve these global systemic problems.

Arun Mara is the President of HelpAge International