Global governance and international law

The big idea: There is no world government — no single authority that rules all countries. Yet the world is not chaos: it is run through global governance — a web of rules, treaties and institutions that states agree to follow. Much of it rests on international law.

• Government = a single authority that can make and enforce binding law over everyone. There is no world government.
• Governance = getting things done through cooperation, rules and institutions — without one ruler above the states.
• Sources of international law — treaties, long-standing custom, general principles, and court rulings.
• Hard vs soft law — hard law is binding (treaties); soft law is not binding but still shapes behaviour (declarations, norms).

The enforcement problem: Because there is no world government, international law has a built-in weakness: it is hard to enforce. States mostly obey because it is in their interest, because of pressure and reputation, and because courts and bodies (the ICJ, WTO) can rule against them — but a powerful state can often ignore the law with little consequence. So global governance works through cooperation and pressure, not a world police.

Global governance is everywhere — from trade rules (WTO) to climate agreements to financial regulation (Basel Accords). It is done by many actors, not just the UN.

Case study — governing a borderless problem: Climate change shows global governance in action. No single state can fix it, and there is no world government to order a solution — so states cooperate through international agreements, guided by scientific bodies, pressured by NGOs, and monitored (loosely) by shared institutions. It works partly — setting shared goals and norms — but its weakness is enforcement: a state can fall short of its promises with little penalty. This captures global governance: real cooperation on shared problems, limited by the lack of a body that can compel states.

The key point: Global governance is how the world is run without a world government — through treaties, institutions and international law that states mostly follow out of interest and pressure. Its strength is enabling cooperation on shared problems; its weakness is enforcement, because no body can compel a powerful state.

Is global governance effective, or just words that the powerful ignore? And is international law real law if it cannot be enforced? Weigh it.

Link it up: Global governance links to interdependence (shared problems push cooperation), sovereignty (governance works around, not above, sovereign states), power (rules can reflect the powerful) and legitimacy (rules are followed when seen as rightful).

How global governance comes up in Paper 1: A Paper 1 source might show states cooperating through rules or a treaty, or a rule being ignored. The key idea: global governance runs the world without a world government, so its constant challenge is enforcement.

Easy marks to lose: 1. Saying there is a 'world government'. There isn't — that's the whole point.



2. Confusing government with governance. Governance = cooperation without a ruler above states.



3. Ignoring enforcement. It is the key weakness of international law.



4. Thinking only the UN governs. IGOs, treaties, courts, NGOs and firms all do.