Editor's Note: Zheng Haizhen, a special commentator for CGTN, is an assistant researcher at the Department for Global Governance and International Organization Studies, China Institute of International Studies. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Global governance is struggling to keep pace with a changing world. The Global South remains underrepresented in key international institutions. Rules and norms have lagged behind technological advances in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence (AI). And many developing countries still lack the funding, technology and skilled personnel needed to participate effectively in global governance.

With only four years left to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG), developing countries still face an annual SDG financing gap of around $4 trillion. In 2025, official development assistance from members and associates of the Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) fell by 23.1% in real terms, the largest annual decline on record.

The technological divide is just as stark. Digitalization and AI are transforming economies and societies at unprecedented speed, but the benefits are far from evenly distributed. In 2025, 74% of the world's population was online, compared with just 34% in the least developed countries. Technological progress, in other words, does not automatically translate into shared development.

It is against this backdrop that China put forward the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). The initiative embraces five core concepts, including sovereign equality, international rule of law, multilateralism, a people-centered approach, and real actions, while seeking to reform and improve global governance and uphold the UN-centered international system.

One longstanding imbalance is the mismatch between the growing economic and demographic weight of the Global South and its voice in international decision-making. China has supported the African Union's permanent membership in the G20, backed the expansion of BRICS and called for reforms of international financial institutions, including greater representation and voice for developing countries at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

But fairer representation is only part of the equation. Countries also need a meaningful role in shaping the rules governing new technologies. AI offers a telling example.

A report submitted by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to the General Assembly this September found that financing for AI capacity-building in developing countries remains fragmented and leaves significant geographical gaps. If a small group of technologically advanced countries not only has advantages in technology, computing power and data but also dominates the rule-making process, today's digital divide could harden into an even deeper AI divide.

China's response has been to link rule-making more closely with capacity-building. Over the next five years, China plans to offer 200 training programs on the digital economy and AI for Global South countries. It has also announced 5,000 places in AI training programs and seminars for participants from developing countries. China will establish international AI application cooperation centers with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the League of Arab States, the African Union, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS, and enable 30 countries to use MAZU, an AI-powered meteorological early-warning system.

These may appear to be technology cooperation programs, but their implications go beyond technology. The ability to shape international rules depends in part on the capacity to understand, develop, and govern the technologies concerned. Without digital infrastructure, skilled professionals and policymaking capacity, developing countries risk remaining rule-takers rather than becoming meaningful participants in rule-making.

The same logic applies to development governance. Since the Global Development Initiative (GDI) was proposed five years ago, it has mobilized more than $23 billion and supported over 1,800 cooperation projects. China has granted zero-tariff treatment to all products from all least developed countries with which it has diplomatic relations. Since May 1 this year, it has extended zero-tariff treatment across all tariff lines to all 53 African countries with which it has diplomatic relations. Taken together, financing, market access, technology cooperation, and capacity-building form a more integrated approach to providing international public goods.

Rules alone cannot deliver effective governance. They must be backed by institutions, resources and the capacity to implement them. Seen in this light, the significance of the GGI lies in bringing China's practices across development, security, climate and digital governance into a more coherent approach. China is promoting institutional reform where representation remains inadequate, contributing to rule-making in emerging areas and providing public goods to strengthen developing countries' capacity to participate in global governance.

That is where China's approach carries broader significance. This approach also stands in contrast to approaches built around exclusive blocs and geopolitical confrontation. By linking institutional reform and rule-making with capacity-building and concrete action, it seeks to translate the principle of extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits from an aspiration into practice. In doing so, it aims to make global governance more representative, inclusive and effective.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)