Home | Author | Volume I | Volume II | Volume III | Acknowledgements | Subject Index

THE FUTURE OF HIGHER (LIFELONG) EDUCATION:
For All Worldwide, A Holistic View

(All chapters are intended for continuing revision)

Return to Chapter 2.14  |  Go to Chapter 2.16

Volume II - Chapter Fifteen

Last updated,  June 1, 2008

PLANETARY GOVERNANCE

Developing countries. . . still model their. . . institutions on assumptions that no longer apply. -- --           --Gibbons 1994    (see: <http://www.egov4dev.org/links.htm>.

Democracy requires that we make leaps of imagination. --Jean Elshtain

..universal access? Democracy needs trustworthy channels of information and deliberation if it is to prosper. --Jan Servaes. Also see: <http://www.publicus.net/articles.html>.

(Wiring the world} gives more power to individuals. . .to directly influence nation-states than ever before. --Thomas Friedman See e-governance <http://216.197.119.113/artman/publish/index1.shtml>>

The children of the Internet finally have a name for their decentralized, networked, bottom-up philosophy. It's called democracy.'  -- Adam Rogers in WIRED, April 2004. Democracy and Governance - http://www.comminit.com/en/demandgov.html

 Citizen `protest.' using cell phones and the Internet--"the sheer ubiquity of such "technologies of freedom"--offers the potential for a rebirth of democracy and citizen participation in global  governance. Cell phone costs are expected to drop to levels making mobile Internet use affordable most everywhere. thus empowering citizen participation in global affairs as never before. For example, elections in Spain and Korea have been powerfully affected by a surge of support from young people using their ce phones to connect with like-minded supporters It  portends a framework for a new method of exercising the will of the people. More suggestive  perhaps was  the `Global Connections' Internet video conference, in November 2007, in which thousands of people in 25 countries and 5 continents participated, many contributing video segments to the conference.

On possibilities for E-Governance in Africa, see the Proposed Global Network of Center for Conflict Management and Resolution (GNCCMR) at< http://tinyurl.com/66gfaf> "Jay W. Forrester once termed the “Enhanced System Dynamics”) At the Center for Conflict Management and Resolution (GNCCMR) there already was a working team on the conflict resolution. (More at: <http://tinyurl.com/kofpf> At the web site of  the Millennium Institute  <http://www.millennium-institute.org> there is system dynamics simulation modeling of various countries."

There must be global-scale research and planning involving local, national and global e-governance. (See, for example, (O'Looney 2000)  Two recommended web sites on global governance and <http://www.odilejacob.fr/indexcyber.asp> for three chapters online of Pierre Levy's book Cyberdemocrdatie (in French) which in 2002 contained dozens of web addresses. Where is the large-scale research that can adequately examine possibilities for adequate global governance? On e-governance see: <http://www.publicus.net/#articles> Foster (2004) reports on the usefulness of political video games. An increasingly difficult issue is political corruption--for example an extent in Africa that limits anti-poverty program--so see: <http://www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/idpm/research/events/PoliticalCorruption/> Change can begin locally, as with the organization in India that has created over 4000 `children's parliaments. Next could children's parliaments be electronically interconnected all over the world to give children a voice in their political and other concerns?.

There is much discussion of  `economic globalization' but not enough about needed `political globalization.' Perhaps in addition to the United Nations there should be much global inter-networking of government agencies at all levels, such as is beginning to happen in the European Union. Rifkin (2004) has pointed out that in the political  use of technology the European Union was already moving ahead of the USA. Instead of government within geographical boundaries, the EU seeks to manage open ended and continually changing human activity through networking where every individual has has some power and voice and where a new kind of cooperative economy emerges. This enable `unity in diversity in a more complex society of cultures, languages and nations than in the USA and is a beginning model for a new kind of democratic global governance that is so essential if humanity is to cope with global terrorism; with global organized crime’s powerful drug wealth, pirating, human trafficking, cruel local civil wars and other crises. Rifkin noted that the American and European Union dreams are diametrically different. “The American Dream puts an emphasis on economic growth, personal wealth, and independence. The new European Dream focuses more on "sustainable development, quality of life and interdependence…and living in a multicultural world.” The Europeans, looking to a new and different future favor diplomacy, negotiation and aid over military force in solving problems and conflicts. The European Union, he thinks, is moving more rapidly into the emerging `networking age’ that is transforming industry and education and also can transform and empower global governance.

A specific illustration: An online conference including representatives of all countries Pakistan to Morocco to Sudan,. They could stay online together for years to dialog on what might be a long-range comprehensive `stabilization development plan' for the Middle East region to provide education and job training for all concurrently with an economic development plan to raise the income level of the poor in the region. As common plans are developed this could become the context also for settling the Israeli-Palestinian issue and other conflicts and crises. Also there are new possibilities for giving a powerful political voice to the often ignored aboriginal peoples of the world, as suggested in the last chapter of KINGDOM OF WEEDS. It is a novel that seeks reader feedback. It proposes that now there can be an online `virtual Native American state’ (online) The spread of just governance will depend on the building of more democratic institutions from the bottom up. even in America where so many people do not vote, where many forces of greed and graft often seek to undo what a majority voted for, and where media and communications are used for propaganda as much as for accurate information. See: Chalaby (2005), Hackett (2005) Coen (2005) and Fenton (2005). Stronger international institutions are also needed if the world is to have more effective governance. A major problem in administering billions of dollars to poor countries is corruption and graft.  Dev (2005), reports one success. "All currency circulation is banned and replaced by online transfer of funds in a way that all transactions are transparent on the web for the citizens to see, question and can be held accountable to the public. This has been successfully demonstrated in India “using OPEN SOURCE tools such as Java, JBoss with PGSQL as backend, all running on Linux.” This tool can be adopted as an e-Governance tool by any Government or organization any where in India or agency in the world. Also, Transperancy International <www.transerancy.org> warns against massive graft, bribery and corruption the limits effective governance.

 On the future of the United Nations: <http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/cardoso.php>.Also European Union experience suggests that global political networking will be a type of local, national and global governance for the future. For example, there could be political hearings at congress that electronically collect online for discussion with those in other countries affected by proposed legislation, and a similar networking of state legislators and local agencies. This would enable grass roots participation to empower `bottom up'  empowerment  instead of just `top down' governance                    

A Global Climate Summit concluded that only a radical improvement in global governance could end the `near paralysis' that prevents action on crucial climate issues. Politicians are not ready for painful change, no matter how crucial for the future. Some changes now begin through increased networking, such as horizontal country-to-country linking of similar government agencies and departments. American states and subdivisions of other countries bypass national governments and establish their own international initiatives. National borders become fuzzy and shifting. Collaboration increases between international corporations and nongovernmental organizations --thousands of them--and regional treaty-established systems such as the European Union. Since the coming down of the Berlin wall the focus of international relations has become electronic. This is true in business and trade, monetary flows, international crime, tourism and health and environmental issues. Yet the old military-oriented diplomacy (us vs. them) system has not yet been transformed for a new era of fair trade and cooperation. Perhaps now terrorist movements will change that?

Where is the imaginative leadership and research to create a global democratic governance system that provides equality and economic justice for everyone in the world? Can it begin in some initiatives like the `Inter Parliamentary Forum of the Americas' that  has sought to help legislators to work together across national lines? For example on terrorism: <http://www.e-fipa.org/news_en.htm>.Mason (2004) pointed out that economic globalization has "become a network of sometimes painful connections" with the world's poor often angry and violent. The promise "peace through commerce" has failed has failed to heed local politics and the problem of dysfunctional governments. With help for local governance in developing countries? <http://www.wmd.org/local/localgov.html>>

Who will undertake the transdisciplinary research needed for more responsible, reliable, effective and democratic governance and `total earth crisis management? What scale of research will be required? A United Nations report has proposed (Fukida-Parr 2002) that strengthened democratic institutions are needed to give more political power to the poor, that is to the world's majority. Can new technologies empower people in both the USA and he world? Some see global `people power. as an emerging counterbalance to the USA as superpower.
 <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jmoore/secondsuperpower.html>. 
'

2.15.1   GLOBAL GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNANCE?

The Group for Rethinking International Governance, organized by Harlan Cleveland (1993)--at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota--used the word governance--not for `world government'--but for "the aggregate of the institutions of cooperation, coordination, and common action among sovereign states and nongovernmental organizations that constitute the management of peace." Needed research wais outlined and clarified by the Commission on Global Governance, in its report "Our Global Neighborhood" (Carlsson 1995.) The work of that commission had been funded by many countries, as diverse as Norway, India, Mexico, Switzerland and Kuwait.

The core function of governance, Cleveland pointed out, inevitably involves research. Large-scale studies and experimentation are also required to develop the processes and institutions for effective global governance. now in the 21st century we see that where `a national or world government might by law compel obedience to recycling, a system of governance would electronically connect all agencies, scientists and scholars involved with the expectation that they will come up with the best way to do it with regulations created from the bottom up instead of from the top down. 

To say that another way, the United Nations and League of Nations, at their establishment, presumed a kind of political will which did not exist, and needed a kind of global community that communications technologies are only now bringing into existence. The U.N. has often sought to work from the top (government level) down. On the other hand, authentic world governance begins from the bottom up through practical experience and agreements to work together. This is seen in programs to monitor and to supervise the world's trade, weather, radio frequencies and other communications, postal services, and airline flights. Research on global governance begins there and proceeds from precedents set by United Nations peacekeeping forces, outer space cooperation, the Law of the Sea, food and refugee aid, environmental agreements, the Antarctic treaty and more. No one yet sees, however, how to expand and use this emerging experience into an effective global governance system. Would it help, for example, if bits and pieces of political science research could be linked into a larger research scheme? For example, linking of local (O'Looney 2000) GIS (Geographic information systems) with layers of data that can be used for efficiency, equity and more comprehensive planning. 

Cleveland's analysis of the United Nations found that better research was needed when it began--and is needed now--as the foundation for an adequate system of world governance. "Most of the leaders of the world's disadvantaged majority did not want stasis; they wanted dynamic change toward a fairer world." The term `world order' is not adequate either, Cleveland said, because it suggests a defense of the status quo when the world needs to "be made safe for diversity." Yet there must be law and law enforcement to deal with international crime, drug trafficking and terrorism, and to manage "commodity cartels and transnational activity of many kinds for the common good of humanity." (2.13.1). No one knows for sure how to accomplish a just and democratic global governance system. If no one authority is in charge, how can there be meaningful governance? "Some global issues require actions by millions of individuals, families, and small groups," Cleveland says. Many issues require the involvement of all governments and peoples, not through centralized authority, but through linkages of many kinds. No one institution can undertake all of the functions of global governance. Many, especially the U.N., are needed.

Vice-president Gore in July 1995 sent a message to a conference on using the World Wide Web in research, saying: "We need to move. . .into the world of collaborative work. The problems of governance are becoming increasingly complex and are going to demand new ways of linking people across organizational boundaries." This approach recognizes the role of new technologies, Cleveland had suggested, and the potential linking of those who have the vision and knowledge to get these projects started. Much of the examination of `civil society' governance is already happening online; some of it through networking by citizen groups in search of new ideas; and some through networking by politicians themselves as well as by university researchers. For example in 1997 a European Union research group was online to explore how information technology might best be used for better governance. Gore (2007) also points to a serious decline of reason in politics.

Global governance should begin with the neighborhood and renew citizenship and responsibility from the bottom up. (See 2.17)  Among other things, this means that in local communities and neighborhoods, responsible citizens must develop local means of communication dialog, since in the west they can no longer trust the huge corporations that now dominate, radio, newspapers and television that no longer feel obliged to allow for diversity and fairness, so much so that democracy is being weakened.

Such networking is also important in reducing terrorism and violence in politics by `giving a global voice' to those w feel they suffer injustice; for example, `OneWorld South Asia' (OWSA)  is a civil society network that seeks to give voice to the voiceless.

 2.15.2  RESEARCH IN GOVERNANCE EXPERIMENTATION

Where and how might larger-scale research to link many such initiatives take place? Highly significant experimentation can involve the creation of computer simulation models to explore alternatives; for example, involving many citizen and government organizations. Social scientists have pointed out that a conscious wave of global networking, `a revolution of social spidering,' is weaving webs of planetary cooperation. On the local level such links for democratic decision making help enlarge the will to act politically. This social `spidering' is creating a horizontal framework for global consultation and governance, instead of a top-down authoritarian world government. An example: in the mid 1980's, Japanese economist Akio Matsumora decided that legislators in various countries should keep in touch with each other and share their research about population problems. Creating a network was not hard or complicated. It did not require vast funding and a bureaucracy. It has shown how traditional power structures can be radically changed with modest cost and effort. Is this linking of government structures at every level a possible way to deal with tyranny and terrorism by building checks and balances into an international system?

There should be a global C-Span where citizens on TV can question politicians. Many calls from overseas now enter that USA TV space to ask questions of government officials--and Frantzich (1996) proposed the future usefulness of digital video for creating a global voice, perhaps conferences following global policy themes. Whittle 1997) suggested that cyberspace will need its own constitution and governance.   If the stability of USA government rests on the principle of `checks and balances--between the congress, president and supreme court--can what John Barry Barlow as called `The Great Conversation' prove one of the checks and balances?  (See <http://www.fair.org>.)

The mayors of the world's thirty-five largest cities--realizing that more than half of the world's people would live in cities within a decade or two--began to develop such networking so they could work closely together in planning and research. Another illustration was a 1997 international policy debate on NATO enlargement, a follow-up of the Madrid summit. It connected Budapest to Brussels and Washington. It was a conferencing initiative of the U.S. State Department and was affiliated with the World Alliance for Citizen Participation. Its purpose was to bring together people, who would otherwise never meet, for a grassroots debate.

Is it possible that global governance is emerging--not as a United Nations type federation of national governments--but through bottom-up electronic linking of local governments and civil society groups worldwide? Governance research should examine these experiments and undertake many more. True democracy begins at the local level--village and neighborhood--where people can actively participate. In October 2004 Technology Review reported on <http://www.meetup.com> where people can meet each other an work together locally to build community. Computer networks already make it possible for local networks to interconnect to influence governments, but how can they help enforce global legislation against criminal syndicates? While the networking of local governments is still primitive, the `global governance process' is gradually emerging in a thousand ways. Individuals and groups are learning how to network around an issue. They share what they are learning and doing, for example on peace and justice issues. C-Span broadcasts legislative hearings and then gives people a chance to phone in with questions and comments. Such experimentation can enlarge on possible forms of governance when properly reviewed and evaluated. Two-way TV, two-way radio, blogs and two-way computer networking can transform governance through more involvement by empowering people in neighborhoods.

There begin to be experimental `alternative online hearings'--following presentations by experts--to debate issues that government agencies are ignoring, or where all responsible points of view are not otherwise being fairly presented. Citizens all over the world now phone in to ask questions or make suggestions. Lunde (1997) early suggested preparation and follow-up through a Web page that outlines and explains options. Anyone anywhere could thus raise questions before the public forum. Motivation to act can be enhanced (2.4.2) if citizens become part of online groups with similar interests and concerns? Lessig (2003) has suggested that "the blog may be first innovation from the Internet to make a real difference in election politics." The development of democracy, from the bottom up, depends on two-way technology to replace TV and radio that speak down to the people without listening back. People empowerment "gets built not from slick commercials," but from new tools that inspire and enable millions of people to talk and act.

A global-scale research strategy might also examine the experience on every continent of groups like `America Speaks.' It has sought to design and demonstrate new mechanisms for governance that involve public and private institutions. While intending later to give more attention to larger governance, its research soon found that local participation was the place to begin. Its research/experimentation involved partnerships with fourteen counties in the Carolinas that were seeking to define their ecological and economic future.  Local computer networking has already empowered people to put pressure on legislators who were voting on projects opposed by a vast majority of citizens. Research at Cambridge University (Aikens 1997) has sought ways to examine many such specific cases.

Experimental forms of governance were also seen in the connecting of the interested public with working conferences, such  as at a 1998 conference in Singapore on quality of life in cities. Or as was seen in networking for the Ukraine Habitat II conference that followed the United Nations Habitat Summit in Istanbul. That Ukraine conference networked mayors of over two hundred towns and cities on a theme often neglected on international agendas: "adequate shelter for all." The advance research included a database of `best practice' case studies. Also, the Coalition for the Development of Urban Africa asked how the Internet may be used to give a voice to the poor. It pointed to the effective influence of the U.S. Conference of Mayors on the American Congress. On democracy online for people empowerment see: <http://www.e-democracy.org/do/>.

New strategies for larger-scale research can evaluate such early efforts "to think seriously and systematically about very large issues in the framework of a global commons." (Cleveland 1993) No one yet knows for sure what styles and methods of governance can best work for justice, human rights and economic and political opportunities for all people. Humanity is still in a `global kindergarten,' Muller (1995) has said. In some ways the emerging global society seems like the `adolescent' American frontier two centuries ago when law enforcement hardly yet existed and `schoolyard' fights were settled with guns. There is dissatisfaction with all of the current alternatives: a world government, regional structures with armies for policing, an upgraded United Nations (although comprehensive research and action on how best to reform the United Nations is an urgent first step), or whatever.

The `Alliance for a Responsible and United World' proposed a decentralized, multicultural movement of peoples for world governance that would be rooted in three constituencies: (a) interconnected local community governments, (b) networks of concerned organizations such as labor, professions, artists, students, religious groups; and (c) groups and organizations working on specific crises and problems such as the economy, development models, tax policies and education. The Alliance has called for coordination of the vast amount of research and experimentation that is underway. It proposes modeling of ways to solve social crises, and better use of existing information on "what humanity knows and wants to do."
 For discussion of possible e-governance in South Asia see:
 <http://www.bytesforall.org/Egovernance/html/bytesforall_intro.pdf

The Research Center for Global Governance, an online `think tank' has had 1206 participants in 93 countries asking for new ideas and solutions in a mega-research context; that is, a `holistic vision' that considered not just political government, but also economic governance, ecology and environmental governance, human rights, moral and ethical questions and much more.  This approach suggests research on how best to expand the policing and law-enforcement of the "whistle-blowing" variety, in which professional associations, business groups and others assume more responsibility for reporting and disciplining malpractice. Valelly (2002) challenges many present approaches to political science research.

Electronic networking and related technologies early opened up a flood of new ideas for research and experimentation as was seen in: `globocorps' as rivals to nation states (Knolke 1996), a new social super organism (Russell 1995), a social contract for responsibility (Havel 1995), new monitoring systems for reducing graft and corruption (della Porta 1996), a global justice and human rights system (Muller 1995), non-spatial (not geographical) government (Tonn 1995), democratizing the United Nations and global corporations (Darcy de Oliveira 1994) a Civil Society Development Fund with a network of local affiliates and global taxation of international money speculation (Cleveland 1995), and much, much more even before mega-scale collaborative efforts seriously begin to examine possibilities for a global governance research strategy.

The United Nations has had fewer employees than the city of Stockholm or the health service program of Wales. Therefore U.N. effectiveness depends on citizens everywhere and upon the coordinated research and action of people in many private and government agencies. The U.N., on a scale never before possible, has gathered comprehensive information on the root causes of humanity's most intractable problems and what ought to be done about them. What humanity and researchers next need, Childers said, is a holistic vision of the systemic relationships between problems. Those who are trained only in one or two fields often lack the larger vision that is essential to solve "dangerous and complex problems." We need a way for politicians and diplomats to "search throughout the world's collective wisdom and experience for imaginative new forms of governance," Those who are honest with themselves, he said, know that we are running out of time. The Commission on Global Governance report began: "The collective power of the people to shape the future is greater now than ever before, and the need to exercise it is more compelling," for democracy, security and sustainability.

A crucial question: how shall essential global governance be financed? And a shift to local e-governance in precincts?

2.15.3  A GOVERNANCE RESEARCH CO-LABORATORY?

The beginning of one research co-lab on governance began under the umbrella of proposals to enlarge, reform, or transform the United Nations. <http://www.un.org/reform>. Announced aims included combating organized crime, fostering development, achieving peace, defending human rights and saving the environment. Recognizing that global governance must involve civil society, the Secretary General, calling for a `Peoples' Millennium Assembly, spoke of a "United Nations family of organizations." Is any possible restructuring of the U.N. enough? Proposals that suggest urgently needed research are in Carlsson (1995).

Other preliminary governance co-labs appear in many places, such satellite conferences among many countries and the "trend-detecting computer conference" set up by governors. Muller (1995) of the United Nations suggested ongoing and regular electronic conferencing links between heads of states. By April 1996 sixteen nations were participating in the `Government Online Project' for the provision of information, electronic support for democracy and videoconferencing among experts in developed and developing worlds. A Government online Resource Center was being set up on the World Wide Web with hyperlinks to other web sites.

Such developments could be the beginning of networking consortia, an experimental global co-lab of university and government experts. In fall of 1997 the European Commission's "Information, Society and Governance Project" initiated an online seminar to invite experts worldwide to suggest answers to three questions and then continue to discuss and evaluate the replies. The questions were: (1) How is information being used in society today? (2) How does this information affect governance? (3) Where are the best examples of this use in organizations and initiatives worldwide? The project sought to use information age technology "to learn together, to inquire together, to think together and reflect together about a complex issue."

The Global Partnership Network (GPN) of the Parliamentary Human Rights Foundation was in 1997 a voluntary nonpartisan association of more than a thousand members of parliaments and congresses in 119 countries who were using the internet to protect human rights and to strengthen democracy. Since governments are the most frequent violators of human rights, the GPN could exert pressure for human rights reform on legislators in a violating government. Since the Internet is more than a communications system, the GPN also was seeking to provide database information on specific cases of human rights violation. It also sought to help legislators get access to the Internet and its helpful information and to improve the connections between informed citizens and their lawmakers. <http://www.gpn.org> See Parliamentary union: <http://www.ipu.org/>.

Hamline University once offered to host and mediate online local government to local government conferences. Hamline already had participation from four continents in private conferences for government officials. That university's conference system has provided geographical data that aided good decision-making and offered "real audio, real video and all vehicles allowed by Internet browsers. Its asynchronous conferencing systems offered "a virtual 3D world," chat, a text based MOO (3.8), and list-serve e-mail participation. What might a network of universities worldwide do similarly to support negotiations and relate research to them?

Some other insights for large-scale co-labs were found in projects like (Starkey and Wickenfeld 1996) the International Communication and Negotiation Simulation (ICONS) project at the University of Maryland. It has used a multi-site computer-assisted simulation to train students in international negotiation. It has involved students in over twenty countries via the Internet, focusing "on such issues as nuclear proliferation, human rights, world health, the global environment and international trade." It has been used in courses on diplomacy, conflict, foreign policy and area studies to help students "learn what it feels like to shape and implement policy for a foreign government." Through such "worldwide co-laboratories," students "gain an understanding of the complexity of and linkages among key international issues. Negotiating with those in other countries students learn that negotiation is about joint problem solving."

In their preliminary research phase, future diplomats learned to use the Internet  and networking to find data bases where they can find relevant treaties, embassy home pages and overseas newscasts. Students are divided into `sub--games' so that a dozen participants role-playing Russia, for example, can subdivide into task groups dealing with economics, ethnicity, environment, etc. As they work on a scenario the participants negotiate among themselves to achieve a consensus, and then negotiate internationally with their counterparts from another country. A more elaborate co-lab has been the GENIe project, based at Case Western Reserve University. Co-sponsored by UNESCO, the International Council of Scientific Unions and the International Social Science Council, developing a consortium of universities on several continents. It was based primarily on MiniLIM world integrated model for assessing sustainable development in relation to the interdependence of global issues. In China has beren used in a Decisions Science course. (GENIe 1997). Such scholarly experiments should not be dismissed as "just games" because simulation games can become a crucial component in research strategies for dealing with the most complex problems. (2.7.1)

Strategies are needed to reduce the increasing corruption that plagues most governments (already discussed here in (2.13) and its related problems of poverty and violence. `Transparency International' has made a start with "The Corruption Perceptions Index' and 'The Bribe Payers Index.'

The United Nations Commission on Social Development once declared that the information revolution is comparable in importance to the industrial revolution, as seen in "partnership-based online monitoring and implementation of the habitat agenda:"  Almost  unnoticed were the weekly online meetings of more than a thousand mayors and municipal employees scattered across America  "to address crucial issues that effect their growing cities." Fossberg 2002) Many such continuing online opportunities are offered to developing world officials by the  Global Development Learning Network.

 Such efforts demonstrate the use of information and communication technologies "to facilitate a transition to more open, equitable and sustainable communities and society." They empower research on an effective monitoring system to warn of global crises.

2.15.4   WARNING SYSTEMS - FOR MORE THAN WAR

Isn't it time to abolish war as a means to settle disputes and replace it with an international police force? Will it require more global disaster to provoke the development of adequate international governance and police forces? And to deal with terrible earthquakes, floods and hurricanes? Chua (2003) has warned of the dangerous potential of global instability, poverty and injustice. She discussed the danger of a `world on fire' as a result of the concentrating of the world's wealth in a few hands. She quoted a `Bolivian tycoon;' "...a country where 3 percent...control everything and 65 percent of the population have no future...is definitely going to blow. It is only a matter of time." Ambassador Moller (2004) proposed that globalization provides an opportunity to solve problems in a new way but warns that "a new social explosion" is indicated by "several dangerous trends, including the reaction of two billion impoverished people to "a global elite that "reserves all the advantages for themselves" and leaves the rest of the human population outside..

 The technology exists to create a crisis warning system. Although only one small part of a world governance system, research on its creation--and further experimentation--would combine and enlarge "joint efforts of international organizations, government agencies, private industry, universities and individual citizens worldwide" (GEMINI 1995). It could provide many kinds of warning danger clocks; military, nuclear, terrorist, population, disease, economic, famine, ecology, etc. Linked to this warning system could be options for action to deal with the crisis, including how to mobilize as many people as the threat required.

Lappe and Dubois (1997) have asked how governance can be more inclusive, involving the participation of all those affected; and be more mutually accountable, everyone accepting some responsibility. "Today's problems are so complex, interrelated, deep and pervasive," they say, "that solutions will come only as millions of citizens begin to tackle them." This suggests the linking and empowering of neighborhood residents to act as `citizen inspectors' (on specific issues) to keep an eye on global politicians as they do building inspectors in Minneapolis and Baltimore. Schell (2003) documents a major shift if power as the usefulness of military power declines --except in police efforts by cooperating nations. Schell also points to the shifting understanding of national sovereignty "The need for global political structures to deal with the globalized economy and the swiftly deteriorating global environment is manifest.".

Another type of warning system is suggested by the Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing's electronic atlas of Agenda 21, the Earth Summit's action plan. This atlas sought to make it easier to monitor progress and impact. Available over the Internet, it has provided maps, charts, surveys, animations, photographic images and country studies. It also has included documentation from the International Plant and Genetic Institute, the World Conservation Monitoring Centre and interactive scenarios linking biodiversity to socioeconomic issues. It has aimed to provide training for monitors in developing world countries. Kevin Cahill's book Preventive Diplomacy (Hines 1997) called for a global conflict warning system involving empirical studies of risk assessment, surveillance, mediation and arbitration or other peaceful actions. Cahill advocated learning from the global health warning system that deals quickly with new epidemics. (2.13.7) Also see: <http://www.cares.missouri.edu/>.

2.15.5  SIMULATIONS, MODELING OF GOVERNANCE

Roger Schank, when at the Yale Artificial Intelligence Lab, pointed out that from now on it will be essential to use computer modeling for making important decisions, models that incorporate more knowledge about people and institutions. Can a research strategy use modeling and simulations to search for ways to base governance more on science, reliable data and experience than on ideology or expediency? Many political models have tended to focus merely on winning elections, as war games focus on winning wars. Even researchers who are involved in international peace-keeping and peace-building may have a subconscious focus on `winning the battle against those who would use violence.' If the warning system predicts imminent war or terrorism, can modeling strategies examine possibilities for diplomatic and  military forces to win the peace rather than just winning a war? What seems impossible--like transforming the world's armies into a peace and justice system to accomplish permanent peace--can be simulated. Again, however, researchers would still be examining only one part of a successful democratic world governance system. See: <http://www.scn.org/cpsr/diac-00/

A lesson to be learned from the USA antislavery movement is that its leaders failed to involve all citizens, including the ex-slaves in planning how emancipation could be accomplished with equity and justice. Inadequate research created misery and injustice because they did not first study the experience of other nations that had already abolished slavery. Now there can be many history games, vision and dreaming games, exploring games, but with other people, not merely for them.  This suggests a more objective problem-solving game: could a team of distinguished Hindu and Buddhist scholars better mediate the Israel-Palestinian conflict, meeting without Muslims, Christians and Jews to see what would be best for them and for the world? (2.7.3).

Research at the Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies has included computerized models of the ministries of Foreign Affairs, <http://www.diplomacy/edu>, the development of a "Diplomacy and International Affairs" Hypertext System, a Virtual Ministry of Foreign Affairs (development model) and a European-Mediterranean support system model for diplomatic partners in the European union. Such regional research efforts can be enlarged to help heads of governments anticipate and be better prepared to cope with political crises and issues of justice, conflict, human rights.

Researchers have found that a major objective of terrorists--who feel that the world has ignored injustice--has often been violence just to get the world to listen. Modeling and simulation could be used to examine the idea of "political theater" for international hearings and grievance presentation that could give potential terrorists a voice, a chance to get the world to pay attention to their grievances. Researchers might examine the possibility of defusing terrorists through such mechanisms as the `right to petition' the U.N., as proposed by the `The Commission on Global Governance. And what about possible models for a world supreme court of justice to which they could appeal for a hearing?

Modeling and simulating could also be used in a large research strategy to explore many other possible world governance proposals. These might include: better uses for the peacekeeping forces of the United Nations, a global assembly of state and regional governments--such as the European Union-- to share research on common problems, a United Nations legislature (see Carlsson on a people's assembly) and to examine the potential or consequences of other proposals the replacing the existing United Nations with something far different. Until recent years it has not been possible to make large conceptual computer models of governments nor of the work of politicians and political parties. Now, however, such models can be increasingly complex, integrated, and can be more useful and trustworthy for testing ideas, theories and possible actions. Computer programs alone will not make good decisions but can be used to help human beings make better ones. Computer modeling and simulations are already beginning to play an important role in government research and planning far beyond space and military projects.

There now could be a global strategic model. Utsumi (1996) would ask each nation to create a comprehensive computer model of its own governance, in which sensitive material could be included under its own control, `hidden' but usable anonymously in a global system that united the models of all countries. Obviously, he says, there would have to be a `global shell' that would make it possible for data to be comparably organized. Such a global-scale governance resource and simulation would be an endeavor of great magnitude. Its database could bring together the resources of all cooperating government intelligence agencies, now that in many situations open sources are more adequate than clandestine ones for democratic governance. (Steele 1996).

Since much better research is needed "especially for the management of ecology and the economy," Utsumi proposes a public "open modeling network" to be used in developing and exploring alternative policies. Researchers can now model the thought of a political leader, such as a Secretary of State, so as to be able to predict how he may act. All kinds of political systems can similarly be modeled. Many such projects are steps toward mega-research that can bridge the gap between science and decision -makers, according to the Director General of UNESCO. The `human factor' can be included in "an ensemble of models." It is essential, the developers of one such simulation say (Mesarovic 1996), that the complex role of humankind be factored into models and modeling. Designers must ask how the human system "functions in time" as people change and are changed by economics or the environment.

The UNESCO/Case Western University GENIe modeling project sought to provide to researchers in different cultures--in a UNESCO consortium of universities--a program to prepare to deal with political governance problems of the 21st century. It has done so with "a holistic view . . . based on interdisciplinary foundations and the use of scientific facts and knowledge with humanistic goals and visions." The project has used advanced informatics--databases, models, reasoning-support procedure, etc.--to deal with the complex phenomena of global change "which can be adapted to other important fields." It uses the Internet, World Wide Web, and "a prototype of an integrated assessment system named GLOBESIGHT" which has also otherwise being used by UNESCO for research on global issues. (Mesarovic 1996)

Human dimension research is not yet adequate, Mesarovic has pointed out, to address the predicaments facing global society in the 21st century. Existing models generally are based on Newtonian mechanics that "are right most of the time, except when really needed." An alternative --based on a biological rather than a mechanical paradigm--are "goal-seeking (or decision-making) models that build in more data, alongside a variety of alternative actions, a range of consequences and a method of evaluation." Newtonian models are useful in many kinds of governance research, Mesarovic says, but they tend to break down when the problem becomes very complex and in building a truly global-scale tool by linking many models for decision-making. Even if each separate model is accurate, there is loss of accuracy in the process of linking them. Research is needed on how to "keep the misrepresentation from being distorted by the linkages." Human actions are so often unpredictable, Mesarovic says, so more research is needed on how a multilevel structure can be constructed "as the first step in integrated modeling of complex systems." The management of complexity requires "even more complex models" to link already large disciplinary models and to resolve uncertainty with an increasing numbers of details introduced into the models.

Research now explores a "third transparent medium" where every fact can be digitalized" and where measurement of collective human activity can be ported over a network." In global financial markets a "billion computerized bits" form a digital globe in which to peer to see ahead and around us. Once wired, Kelly (1994) has pointed out, we can truly see! Satellites, modems, video cameras, tape recorders and much more become more than eyes and ears. "Connected together they form a billion-noded sense organ. No governance modeling system is yet adequate to anticipate every detail of a possible crisis and its consequences, nor is it likely to be large enough in our lifetime. Yet we are entering a time when advanced modeling and simulation systems can be effectively applied to political problems. This is illustrated in the mapping of the global ecology crisis. Researchers now can include what has happened in history, along with what is happening now and for anticipating what may happen next. When that is combined with data from every region of the world a picture of the entire global political system" can emerge. We do not yet know what kinds of mega-research will be possible when the model of political systems is linked into a holistic model of the entire human social system, using the power of a thousand linked supercomputers. Transperancy is essential for the reduction of graft.

Forrester, Meadows and others, Kelly reported, created highly successful models and simulations in which "for the first time, the planetary system of life, earthly resources, and human culture... were embodied in a simulation...which generates quantifiable results." He reported many limitations in those models and proposed how they may be continually updated to "spin significantly varied scenarios" based on more comprehensive data, demonstrating increasing complexification and incorporating distributed learning. Alternative models for world governance, world peace, world courts and law, can be tried out through simulations.

A simulation of governing might be horizontal in regions, clusters of nations, instead of `top down' national or global. Researchers might simulate a virtual world assembly, via teleconference, could try out global legislation, political campaigns and other political action, and elections. Candidates and their followers could post favorable information about themselves and critical assertions about their opponents. Charges could be documented by hypertext web links to supporting records. Under the watchful control of monitoring protocols, every insertion could be `signed.' dated, and recorded in a publicly accessible audit trail. Millions of people could be active participants in the process on the Internet.

Simulations could help researchers find out how electronic interactive politics would function, how well citizens could be informed, and how actively they would involve themselves. Licklider once said that it might be a long time before computer networks and conferences could be used for the official work of legislatures. Now, however, is the time for large-scale research experiments. Meanwhile, the embryo of a world governance system of diagnosis, consultation, monitoring, prognosis and action. . . to deal with. . . planetary problems" is coming into existence. (Muller 1995). Humanity "has entered a totally new era" with a "wealth of data and knowledge on every conceivable world problem," making possible "the beginning of a science of planetary management."

2.15.6  MORE INFORMATION AND A LARGER GLOBAL (and local) VISION

Perhaps one of the most promising areas of e-governance begins by strengthening neighborhoods and villages to give a voice to people  `from the bottom up.' <http://www.localgovernance.org/>. Also, Kofi Annan of the UN, in Foreign Affairs, June 2005 pointed out that no one nation alone can deal the dangers of terrorism, international crime, new infectious diseases, poverty, civil violence, the coming energy and water crises,  and devastating poverty. 

Getting government and United Nations documents available online free of charge has been a first step toward the coordination and enlarging of the scattered data bases worldwide that can empower larger-scale governance research. Peace, ecology and women's networks have also shown the potential role of data bases in a civil-society based governance. Linking more such databases for a research system, Cleveland says, are already driving the world toward a new style of global governance. The university research role in creating such databases is illustrated in the (USIP 1997) Virtual Diplomacy conference paper on the "Information Technology and Diplomacy" program at the University of Malta. Diplomacy students there helped create an International Legal Database that included over two thousand multilateral agreements. This kind of research, it was reported, can help transform the entire process of diplomacy as better information under girds all global governance.

Rashmi Mayur of India, reviewing proposals for reorganizing the United Nations, said that humanity must have governance institutions with a larger vision. The Commission on Global Governance would create a new institutional partner that might later become a people's assembly in the U.N. It might start by the convening of "an annual Forum of Civil Society," attended by representatives of NGO's accredited to the U.N. General Assembly. The Internet would now make it possible for such a global assembly to be connected to such groups on the local, state and national levels. The global assembly might each year discuss items on the U.N. agenda, and items which the U.N. seems to be neglecting. Its main function might well be partnership in research.

Much action and governance must be local, even in the neighborhood. Foreman (2003), discussing `game based learning' in business and elsewhere,  has reported that `the Foresight and Governance Project' had plans to use `educational gaming' with policy makers. In 2003 their `Serious Games Workshop' brought together educators and game developers to brainstorm  "public policy game scenarios." In the future "games and simulations' may be used to teach people how to dela with disasters, design better environmental treaties or "grapple with options for taming urban sprawl." Developing country poverty regions need better local rural and village governance, and more control of aid funds; government from the bottom up rather than from the top down. (Dev 2005) on experience in India. See 2.17)

Perhaps it is too early in history to anticipate a time when the staff of all agencies of all governments--local to national--are electronically linked together by function to constitute the structures of global governance. For example, every local health inspector's office might be linked to every other such office in the world for mutual assistance. Larger-scale research is needed before we will know how to make such local offices more effective in a global health preventive health plan. That is also true of enforcement of laws and regulations in every other area of human life. Not yet can all officials with local, regional or national authority all see themselves as also having part-time staff responsibilities in United Nations or other governance structures. Now is the time, however, to involve all universities in research strategies to "search for answers to complicated issues. . . which go far beyond the boundaries of nations." (Mayur 1995). There is only limited research, not enough on which to base any agreement, on how to fund the United Nations and all global governance projects A small tax on all international financial transactions has been proposed, or a `green tax' on polluters. Perhaps every state and national health inspection office should share a fraction of budget for a global program. (See Carlsson 1995 and Henderson 1996 for funding research suggestions.) People-power, however, does not need to wait for funding, as illustrated by many new software programs. For example, the World Bank InfoDev program has been developing an e-government tool kit for developing countries. (Schwartz  2002) A former White House press secretary (see Wilmer  2001) has developed software that can be used for `virtual town meetings.'  On e-governance:
 <http://www.e-devexchange.org/eGov/topic1.htm>.     

"Few proposed reforms would help make government function without more active and informed citizen participation. (Bok 2001) Also, the director of the London School of Economics pointed out that "even the most democratic countries are not democratic enough." (Giddens 2001) Robert Muller, retired now from the United Nations, reminded us that "humanity is still in a global kindergarten of proper planetary management.   need new global structures for education, justice and human rights, development and democracy. How can those politicians who continue failed strategies be re-educated? Perhaps beginning locally? (O'Looney 2000.) See www.xlibris.com/CompetingintheNewEconomy.html Yet "the instinct for reform (must) be hardwired into the practice of government." Kettl 2000)  

So what next? Singer (2002) proposed the lack of governments concern for all peoples as a serious ethical issue as "the 21st century faces the task of developing a suitable form of governance'  for a global society. He sees a step-by-step pragmatic approach to global governance, seen for example in the move toward `core global labor standards,' A next step might be "the development of  United nations Economic and Social Security Council that would take charge of the task ofo eliminating global poverty." Or the sort of global planning network proposed here in 3.10. Another next step might be a global network for lifelong education. Humanity needs to move out of an `adolescent' period of history. (Kohak 1995.) Most essential, will be the `education of all to equip global citizens. <http://www.ictliteracy.info/>.'Lessig, Lawrence. 2003. "The New Road to the White House." Wired, November. Moller (2004) urges a new strategy for globalization that "seeks to  solve problems in a new way," cooperation rather than conflict in a quest for economic justice for all.  The alternative, he has said, "is anew social explosion of the disenfranchised" with confrontations of a very ugly nature."

What the 21st century needs (Clark 2004) is "a renewed normative vision of how governance should operate so why not continuing education for politicians who assume office: On e-governance: (note the alternative models described)
 <http://216.197.119.113/artman/publish/index1.shtml>. OECD (2004) provides illustrations of how e-governance  in vaious countries is improving efficiency, increasing quality and effectiveenss, saving money, improving inter-agency cooperation and improving democracy by engaging citizen involvement.

In the next chapter we look at needed research to reduce global conflict--sometimes even involving terrorism-- between religions. We ask if some large-scale research might help religions play a more constructive role in providing motivation and vision. Neighborhood governance is discussed in   2.17.

Return to Chapter 2.14  |  Go to Chapter 2.16


Bibliographical Notes

Bok, Derek. 2001. The Trouble With Government. Harvard University Press.

Brainard, Jeffrey. 2002. "U. S. Agencies Look to Interdisciplinary Science." Chronicle of Higher Education, June 14.

Chalaby, Jean. 2005. Transitional Television Worldwide: Toward a New Media Order. London: Macmillan.

Chua, Amy. 2004. World on Fire. New York: Doubleday.

Clark, John N. (ed) 2004. Global Governance in the 21st Century. New York: Palgrave/ Macmillan.

Cleveland, Harlan. 1993. Birth of a New World. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cohen, Elliott. 2005. News Incorporated: Corporate Media Ownership and its Threat to Democracy. Amherst NY: Prometheus.

Dev, Kris. 2005. "Transforming Governments to achieve Transparency and Accountability." http://ll2b.blogspot.com

Falk, Richard. 2001. "Toward Global Parliament." (need for citizen international participation.) Foreign Affairs.  Jan./Feb.

Fenton, Tom. 2005.  Bad News: The Decline of Reporting. Bew York: Harper Collins.

Ferguson, Y.H. et al. 2004. Remapping Global Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Foreman, Joel. 2003. "Next Generation Educational Technology." Educause, July/Aug.

Foster, A. L. 2004. "Video Games With a Political Message." Chronicle of Higher Education. Oct. 29.

Fossberg, Melissa. 2000. "Linking the World Through Learning.: Global Development Learning Network, June..

Frantzich, Stephen and John Sullivan. 1996. The C-Span Revolution. Norman OK: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.

Fukida-Parr et al. 2002. Human Development Report 2002. Deepening Democracy in a Fragmented World. Oxford University Press.

Giddens, Anthony. 2001. The Global Third Way Debate. London: Blackwell

Gordon, Paula. 2001. "Public Administration in the Public Interest." in 2003 online

Gore, Al. 2007. The Assault on Reason. New York: Penguin.

Hackett, Robert et al. Democratizing Global Media: One World, Many Strtuggles. Lanham MD: Rowman and Wakefield.

Held, David, et al. 2003. Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance. Mandan, MA. Policy Press. Discusses a multilayed system fo global governance that includes more stakeholders

Heymann, Philip. 2003.  Terroism, Freedom and Security: Winning Without War. Cambridge: MIT Press.,

Jackson, Robert. 2000. The Global Covenant. Oxford University Press

Kohak, Erazim. 1995. "The Faces of Democracy. Kettering Review. Fall

Leob, Eric.  2001.  Online Global Brain discussion, June 12.  

Lefort, Rene. 2001. "Striking Media Giants with News on the Web." UNESCO Courier, May.

Lessig, Lawrence. 2003. "The New Road to the White House." Wired, November.

Levy, Pierre. 2002. Cyberdemocratie. Paris: Odile Jacob

Mason, A.L. 2004. "Acting Globally Thinking Locally." University of Chicago magazine, March.

Mesarovic, M. D.  1996. "Cyberfnetics and Global Change: Human Dimension and Management of Complexity." Paris, UNESCO.

Moller, J. Orstrom. 2004. "Wanted: A New Strategy for Globalization." Futuristt, Jan./Feb.

Muldoon, J. P. 2004. The Architecture of Global Governance. Denver: Westview.

Muller, Robert and Douglas Roche. 1995. Safe Passage Into the 21st Century. New York: Continuum.

Nye, Joseph S. (Ed.) 2000. Governance in a Globalizing World. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.

OECD. 2001. Governance in the 21st Century. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

OECD. 2004. The e-Government Imperative. OECD, Paris.

O'Looney, John. 2000. Beyond Maps: GIS and Decision Making in Local Government. Redlands CA: ESRI

Osborne, David and Peter Plastrik. 2001.The Reinventor's Fieldbook. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Power, Samantha and Graham Allison, 2000. Realizing Human Rights. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Raiser, Konrad. 2002. "For A Culture of Life: Transforming Globalization and Violence." Geneva, Switzerland, WCC Publications.

Rifkin, Jeremy. 2004. The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future is .Eclipsing the American Dream. New York: Tarcher/Pengin.

Sassen, Saskin. 2002. "Globalization After September 11." Chronicle of Higher Education, January 18.

Schell, Jonathan. 2003. The Unconquerable World. New York: Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt. 

Schwartz, Ari. 2002. "E-Government Tool Kits for Developing Countries."  World Bank, Feb. 25.  <http://www.cdt.org>

http://worldbank.org/publicsector/e-gov/ ..> .

Shane, Peter. 2004. Democracy Online. New York: Routledge.

 Shapiro, Ian et al. 2000. Designing Democratic Institutions. New York University Press.

Shaw, Martin. 2000. Theory of the Global State.  Cambridge University Press.

Singer, Peter/ 2002. "Navigating the Ethics of Globalization, Chronicle of Higher Education, Oct. 11.

Spady, Richard et al. 2002.The Leadership of Civilization Building. Seattle WA: Forum Foundation.  

Strong, Maurice. 2001."Reforming the United Nations." Futurist, Sept./Oct.

Sunstein, Cass. 2001.  Republic.com, Princeton University Press,

Thomas, Scott. 2005. The Global Resurgence of Religion and the Transformation of International Relations. New York: Palmgrave MacmIllan..

Valelly, Rick. 2002. "How Political Scientists Can Help Fight the War on Terrorism." Chronicle of Higher Education, July 19.

Warkentin, Craig. 2001. Reshaping World Politics. Lanham MD: Rowman and Littlelfield.

Whittle, David B. 1997. Cyberspace:The Human Dimension. NY: W. H. Freeman.
http://www.ige.org.
 

Williamson, T. et al. 2002. Making a Place for Community: Local Democracy in a Global Era.: Routledge.

 

 

 

The Future of Higher (Lifelong) Education: For All Worldwide: A Holistic View
http://ecolecon.missouri.edu/globalresearch/chapters/2-15.html
For more information contact Parker Rossman
July 12, 2006 -- Copyright © 2002-2005 Parker Rossman