Reforming Global Governance Institutions at Times of Great Power Rivalry: Crafting an African Perspective
On 5 May 2025, the NAVIGATOR project convened a workshop in Johannesburg to explore how global governance is being reconfigured and how this transformation is perceived from Africa. Hosted in collaboration with our local partner, the University of the Witwatersrand, and with a special focus on Security and Migration, the event brought together scholars and students from 4 different continents. All intended to unpack the limits of the current multilateral order and the possibilities for reform from an African perspective.
Topics discussed included:
- The G20 in Africa – a catalyst for global governance reform? with Malte Brosig (University of the Witwatersrand), Daniel Bradlow and Sithembile Mbete (University of Pretoria), Arina Muresan (Institute for Global Dialogue)
- Anatomy of a stalemate or who needs an unreformed UN Security Council with Faith Mabera and Malte Brosig (University of the Witwatersrand), Roland Paris (Université d’Ottawa), Priyal Singh (Institut d’études de sécurité), Gustavo de Carvalho (South African Institute of International Affairs)
- Towards a Decolonial World Order, keynote by Siphamandla “Si” Zondi (University of Johannesburg)
- Regional and Global Initiatives Regulating Migration in Africa with Westen Shilaho (University of Johannesburg), Chloé Brière and Johan Ekstedt (Université libre de Bruxelles), Margaret Monyani (Institut d’études de sécurité)
Old Systems, New Realities
The discussion opened with a shared sense of urgency. Reform of global governance institutions is no longer a matter of preference but of necessity. While African countries remain underrepresented in major multilateral fora, the geopolitical landscape is rapidly shifting: the relative influence of Western powers is declining, and new actors and alliances are emerging – from BRICS to ad hoc coalitions – reshaping the terrain.
One of the central themes was the persistent imbalance in global economic governance. The Bretton Woods institutions, often viewed from Africa as powerful pillars of international finance, are in fact losing influence and resources. Meanwhile, the creation of new, truly global institutions is seen as increasingly unlikely in today’s fragmented international climate. This makes it all the more critical to work within the existing system, leveraging platforms like the IMF, World Bank, or G20 more strategically.
The Limits and Leverage of Informal Forums
This pragmatic stance resonated throughout the conversations. The G20, for example, offers an opportunity for countries like South Africa to shape global debates, provided expectations are tempered. As an informal, consensus-based club, the G20 has inherent limits. Participants warned against expecting structural transformation from such a forum. Instead, they proposed using it as a launching pad for targeted initiatives and international alliances, as Brazil once did with its coalition on hunger and poverty.
These reflections were part of a broader critique of the multilateral system’s architecture. While formal representation matters, so too does the deeper question of inclusion: who gets to define the “rules-based order,” and whose voice is heard? The liberal international order, often framed as neutral or universal, was criticized for being built on selective values and historical asymmetries. If reform is to be meaningful, it must address not just power imbalances, but the epistemic and normative structures that sustain them.
The Search for Alternatives
A fundamental point of this workshop was an analysis of nowadays United Nations Security Council’s role. With a record number of vetoed resolutions in 2024 and a growing disconnect from its mission to maintain global peace, the Council’s role is being questioned. While conflicts keep emerging from Gaza and Ukraine to Sudan and Myanmar, the Council’s ability to respond constructively has diminished. No new peacekeeping missions have been launched in years, and consensus around sanctions has eroded.
Despite growing frustration, participants were realistic: radical UNSC reform remains out of reach. Building entirely new institutions is neither practical nor timely. But smaller steps could still make a difference. These include procedural innovations – like rotating penholdership or leveraging underused UN Charter provisions – and boosting African agency within existing mechanisms. While imperfect, these adjustments could open space for greater engagement and creative diplomacy.
The workshop eventually shifted the focus to migration governance, a field where African agency often clashes with externally imposed frameworks. Migration across the continent is shaped by fluid borders, informal economies, and institutional fragilities, but also by adaptability, social networks, and collective resilience. The conversation highlighted a persistent disconnect between formal international agreements and the realities on the ground, as well as the need to move away from securitised approaches driven by external agendas. Instead, the emphasis was placed on building solidarity-based frameworks that respond to the diversity of African contexts and centre the experiences and strategies already present across the continent.
The workshop closed on a clear-eyed yet constructive note. The multilateral system may be at a crossroads, but there is still room for agency, strategy, and imagination. Reform might be slow and uneven, but voices from the Global South are now also reshaping the conversation.
