Davos and the Dangers to Democracy
Davos and the Dangers to Democracy
By Nick Buxton / globaljustice.org.uk

It’s an all-too-easy event to mock. It’s hard to keep a straight face when the world’s rich arrive annually in their private jets to the luxury ski-resort of Davos to express their deep concern about growing poverty,  inequality and climate change. US comedian Jon Stewart has labelled the World Economic Forum (WEF) the ‘money oscars’ and lampooned the media’s giddy sycophantic coverage of the event; Bono, himself a regular at the summit, jokes that it is a summit of ‘fat cats in the snow’.

This year will be no different. 2500 corporate executives, politicians and a few Hollywood stars are expected to descend this week on Davos to discuss both the growing jitters about the faltering global economy as well as pontificate on the the official theme of the conference, namely the “fourth industrial revolution” (Think robots, AI and self-driving cars).

The real concern about the WEF, however, is not the personal hypocrisy of its privileged delegates. It is rather that this unaccountable invitation-only gathering is increasingly where global decisions are being taken and moreover is becoming the default form of global governance. There is considerable evidence that past WEFs have stimulated free trade agreements such as NAFTA as well helped rein in regulation of Wall Street in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

Less well known is the fact that WEF since 2009 has been working on an ambitious project called the Global Redesign Initiative, (GRI), which effectively proposes a transition away from intergovernmental decision-making towards a system of multi-stakeholder governance.   In other words, by stealth, they are replacing a recognised model where we vote in governments who then negotiate treaties which are then ratified by our elected representatives with a model where a self-selected group of ‘stakeholders’make decisions on our behalf.

Advocates of multi-stakeholder governance argue that governments and intergovernmental forums, such as the UN,  are no longer efficient places for tackling increasingly complex global crises. The founder of WEF Klaus Schwab says “the sovereign state has become obsolete”. WEF has created 40 Global Agenda Councils and industry-sector bodies, with the belief these are the best groups of people to develop proposals and ultimately decisions related  to a whole  gamut of global issues from climate change to cybersecurity.

Corporations are put at the heart of this model, because they provide in the view of Klaus Schwab and  corporate elites, the possibilities of“agile” governance, drawing on the private sector’s experience of “adapting to a new, fast-changing environment”. Governments are encouraged to tackle every issue by allying with private sector in public-private partnerships. And a few carefully selected civil society representatives are invited in to legitimise the process. Questions of how issues are framed, who is chosen, from what sectors, for whose benefit, and accountable to whom are brushed under the carpet.

An examination of the WEF’s board, is illustrative of the sort of elite groups that emerge as a result, given that WEF likes to see itself as a working model of this new multi-stakeholder world. WEF says that on its website that it is “accountable to all parts of society” carefully “blend[ing] and balanc[ing] the best of many kinds of organizations, from both the public and private sectors, international organizations and academic institutions.” But when only 6 of its 24 “exemplary” Board members are women (25%), 16 are from North America and Europe (67%), 22 of the 24 went to universities in US and Europe (10 in fact went to the same university, Harvard) and there is not one African Board member, it does raise questions about what they think accountability and representation looks like.

However its when you look at the careers of the Board members that the real driving force behind this model is clear.While half of the Board (12) are currently corporate executives, if you look at their career history, this rises to two-thirds. Only one member can be said to represent civil society (Peter Maurer of Red Cross). There are no representatives of trade unions, public sector organisations, human rights groups, peasant or indigenous organisations, students and youth.

It is therefore no surprise when multi-stakeholder policy groups rarely, if ever, recommend any binding regulations that would damage corporate profits. University of Massachusetts professor Harris Gleckman, who has closely studied GRI, says that one of its central tenets is that opt-in, voluntaristic approaches are the best way for tackling social and environmental issues. So codes of conduct become the norm, and international binding standards and regulations are rejected (except of course when it concerns facilitating trade in commerce and finance in which case legally enforceable protections for corporations are very welcome). In other words, corporations are free to pick and choose what they act on and not bound by any enforceable legislation that could control their social and environmental impact.

This elite-led model of governance is proliferating globally like a virulent rash. The World Water Forum, the Marine Stewardship Council and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) are just three of thousands of multi-stakeholder groups .They are becoming the default option for global governance, and there is nothing in international law to stop this. What WEF is trying to do is to turn these models into a multi-stakeholder governance system. As Harris Gleckman points out,  “What is ingenious and disturbing is that the WEF multi-stakeholder governance proposal does not require approval or disapproval by any intergovernmental body. Absent any intergovernmental action the informal transition to multi-stakeholder governance as a partial replacement of multilateralism can just happen.”

This model is even having a growing impact on existing intergovernmental forums. The recent agreement at Paris COP21, so celebrated worldwide, is typical. Gone was any reference of binding agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol agreed in 1997, or any attempt to tie actions to scientific advice let alone historic responsibility. Instead we got voluntary ‘promises’ of action (known as Intended Nationally Determined Contributions), a call for greater private sector involvement, and a commitment to try and do better in five years time.

The critical issue of food provides another example of what this shift towards corporate-led multistakeholderism can mean in practice. When food prices surged dramatically in 2007 to 2008, causing food riots and social unrest, a plethora of multi-stakeholder initiatives emerged in response. This included the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN), the African Green Revolution Association (AGRA),  the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis (HLTF) and its parallel G8 public-private partnership (PPP) initiative, the Global Partnership for Agriculture and Food Security and the Scale Up Nutrition (SUN) initiative.  They also included the WEF’s own Global Food, Agriculture and Nutrition Redesign Initiative (GFANRI).

The groups’ proposals all followed a similar very template  - advocating for policies that liberalise trade, increase production, encourage corporate investment and help expand agroindustries control of food. They pointedly ignore issues of distribution and waste or the need for democratic access and control of land and food. Moreover these groups systematically sought to close down multilateral spaces, such as the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition (SCN), that actually examined these issues. No wonder, long-time food sovereignty activist, Flavio Vicente calls this corporate capture a “life grab” which “threatens the achievement of food sovereignty and the full emancipation of women.”

The result is that we are increasingly entering a world where gatherings such as Davos are not laughable billionaire playgrounds, but rather the future of global governance. It is nothing less than a silent global coup d’etat.

This article draws on themes explored in essays and infographics in Transnational Institute’s annual ‘State of Power’ report available at http://www.tni.org/stateofpower2016

4.0 ·
1
What's Next
Trending Today
Who Are You? Watching This Breathtaking Video Could Be the Moment You Change Your Life
2 min · 15,204 views today · "Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work, driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for, in order to get to a job that you need so you can...
Welcome to Marinaleda: The Spanish Anti-Capitalist Town With Equal Wage Full Employment and $19 Housing
Jade Small · 12,465 views today · With virtually no police, crime or unemployment, meet the Spanish town described as a democratic, socialist utopia. Unemployment is non-existent in Marinaleda, an Andalusian...
When You Kill Ten Million Africans You Aren't Called 'Hitler'
Liam O'Ceallaigh · 11,609 views today · Take a look at this picture. Do you know who it is? Most people haven’t heard of him. But you should have. When you see his face or hear his name you should get as sick in...
How a Trump Presidency Would Unleash a Torrent of Racist Violence-And Devastate the Left
Arun Gupta · 11,503 views today · The Left should take the Trump threat very seriously.
Forest Man
16 min · 7,275 views today · Since the 1970's Majuli islander Jadav Payeng has been planting trees in order to save his island. To date he has single handedly planted a forest larger than Central Park NYC...
Today I Rise: This Beautiful Short Film Is Like a Love Poem For Your Heart and Soul
4 min · 7,006 views today · "The world is missing what I am ready to give: My Wisdom, My Sweetness, My Love and My hunger for Peace." "Where are you? Where are you, little girl with broken wings but full...
How to Criticize with Kindness: Philosopher Daniel Dennett on the Four Steps to Arguing Intelligently
Maria Popova · 6,504 views today · “Just how charitable are you supposed to be when criticizing the views of an opponent?”
Maya Angelou's 3-Word Secret to Living Your Best Life
3 min · 6,468 views today · Dr. Maya Angelou says that in order to be the best human being you can be, you must follow one simple directive: "Just do right." Watch as Dr. Angelou reveals how you can never...
Alan Watts: What If Money Was No Object?
3 min · 4,698 views today · How do you like to spend your life? What do you desire? What if money didn't matter? What if money was no object? What would you like to do if money were no object? Spoken...
10 Shocking Facts About Society That We Absurdly Accept As Normal
Joe Martino · 4,193 views today · When you take a moment and look around at the world, things can appear pretty messed up. Take 5 or 10 minutes and watch the 6 o’clock news. Chances are, the entire time, all...
What Makes Call-Out Culture So Toxic
Asam Ahmad · 3,855 views today · Call-out culture refers to the tendency among progressives, radicals, activists, and community organizers to publicly name instances or patterns of oppressive behaviour and...
What It Really Means to Hold Space for Someone
Heather Plett · 3,535 views today · How to be there for the people who need you most
Do You Have Time to Love?
Thich Nhat Hanh · 3,215 views today · The greatest gift you can offer loved ones is your true presence.
Capitalism Is Just a Story - Rise Up and Create a New One
6 min · 3,002 views today · How many of us have a sneaking suspicion that something pretty fundamental is going wrong in the world? We keep hearing about the potentially devastating consequences of...
11 Traits of People With High Emotional Intelligence
Raven Fon · 2,679 views today · Lately, new ways to describe human interactions, social behaviours, and many facets of psychology have emerged on the social network scene. One of those descriptions is “high...
Doctors Response to Daily Mail Bigotry is Beautiful
Neil Tiwari · 2,628 views today · A poetic open letter to the Daily Mail newspaper from Dr. Neil Tiwari, in response to a bigoted attack on his colleagues, is going viral and it's beautiful.
Caitlin Moran's Posthumous Advice for Her Daughter
Caitlin Moran · 2,175 views today · My daughter is about to turn 13 and I’ve been smoking a lot recently, and so – in the wee small hours, when my lungs feel like there’s a small mouse inside them, scratching to...
Ten Ways We Misunderstand Children
Jan Hunt · 2,074 views today · 1. We expect children to be able to do things before they are ready. We ask an infant to keep quiet. We ask a 2-year-old to sit still. We ask a 3-year-old to clean his room...
Better, Not More
5 min · 2,053 views today · As we assess the current state of our world and consider together the elements that are essential to a ‘just transition’, and ultimately, a just economy, we are called to...
Real Change in Democracy Comes Not in the Voting Booth but Activism at the Grass-Roots
Ilze Peterson · 1,594 views today · Many years ago, the late Judy Guay, a low-income woman from Bangor, founded the Maine Association of Interdependent Neighborhoods in order to advocate for the neediest in our...
Load More
Like us on Facebook?
Davos and the Dangers to Democracy