Global Governance Initiative: Toward a fairer global governance system

Editor's note: Wang Ren is a professor at the Institute for National Strategy and Regional Development, Zhejiang University, and deputy director of the Centre for International Studies on Development and Governance. This article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

At the 2026 Global Governance Forum (Xiongan), held from October 23 to 25, China announced eight practical actions to advance the Global Governance Initiative (GGI). But announcements are only a starting point. The real test is whether these commitments translate into fairer rules, wider participation and tangible results.

A report released during the forum, "Global Governance Initiative: Toward a More Just, Inclusive and Orderly World," identifies three linked challenges: fairness, inclusiveness and order. At their heart are three questions: Who helps make the rules? Who shares in development opportunities? And how can countries sustain a shared order?

The GGI advocates sovereign equality, the international rule of law, multilateralism, a people-centered approach and practical action. Its central proposition is that global governance should be a shared responsibility, not the preserve of a few. But participation means little unless countries can also influence priorities and decisions.

'Fairness' starts with a genuine say in rule-making

Global South countries are major drivers of world economic growth, yet their influence in some international financial institutions has not kept pace. The IMF's 2023 quota review approved a 50% increase in quotas but kept members' relative shares unchanged. More resources, but no shift in voting power. A representation deficit can become a legitimacy deficit when countries are expected to follow rules they had little say in making.

China supports reform within existing frameworks, including the United Nations and the IMF, to give African and other developing countries a stronger voice. It has also worked with other countries to launch the Hong Kong-based International Organization for Mediation, offering another route to resolve disputes beyond litigation and arbitration. In May 2026, less than a year after opening, the organization successfully mediated its first case, a maritime dispute involving parties from China and Singapore. Such efforts aim to complement existing institutions, not create exclusive alternatives. Fairness must be visible in voting rights and meaningful participation, not just in statements of principle.

'Inclusiveness' means more than a seat at the table

Access alone is not influence. According to the International Telecommunication Union, 2.2 billion people worldwide remained offline in 2025. Artificial intelligence (AI) risks turning the digital divide into deeper gaps in computing power, data and expertise. Without those capabilities, countries may join negotiations but struggle to shape the rules. Today's technology gap could become tomorrow's gap in rule-making power.

China launched the AI Capacity-Building Action Plan for Good and for All in 2024 and released a progress report this year. Its value will depend on whether support builds lasting local capacity rather than offering one-off access to technology. Genuine inclusion means moving beyond the right to participate toward the ability to propose solutions, influence standards and share in technological gains. In AI governance, capacity building is not only development assistance; it also helps determine whose needs shape international rules.

'Order' depends on rules shaped together

Order does not mean freezing today's rules. It means keeping them credible as risks evolve. Selective compliance undermines existing commitments, while activities on the high seas and in outer space expose governance gaps. If a few technologically advanced countries write the rules before others can engage, old inequalities could be built into new domains.

The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement, the UN treaty on marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, entered into force in January 2026. As one of its first parties, China supports its effective implementation. During the forum, China also issued a position paper on strengthening outer space governance, calling for rules that keep pace with exploration and encourage broad participation. Both efforts point to a wider principle: rules are more durable when the countries expected to follow them can help shape them.

Implementation faces its own test: Can new platforms deliver? More than 60 countries have joined the Group of Friends of Global Governance, creating a channel for sustained dialogue. China has also announced plans for a Global Governance Research Center and a Global Governance Index. Such an index could identify gaps and spur improvement, provided its methodology is transparent and informed by diverse national perspectives. What matters is whether measurement leads to change.

For China, leadership in global governance means widening participation, not deciding for others. The APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting in Shenzhen on November 18 and 19 offers an early test: will its priorities of openness, innovation and cooperation yield gains that developing economies can use? Fairness gives shared rules legitimacy; inclusiveness allows more countries to shape them; and order makes cooperation sustainable. Ultimately, the GGI will be judged not by declarations alone, but by whether these principles help countries solve common problems.

(Cover via VCG)