From France, it crossed the Channel and in England came to designate the method of organizing feudal power. Underlying feudal power were adjacent “suzerainties” — among which there had to be coherence.

There was no central power as such, but a body, primus inter pares, whose purpose was to settle disputes peacefully and see that any conflicting interests were reconciled by consultation with those involved.

Governance thus focused on unity — not uniqueness — of interests. If we liken the international society to a medieval society in its lack of any organized central power, then it needs governance.

In other words, a concept that affords a basis for the organization of power, or the elements of consultation and dialogue necessary to securing greater harmony.

The concept of governance disappeared in the 16th century with the emergence of the nation state, because the two notions “governance” and “government” are profoundly different. Governance removes the political dimension from government.

The latter belongs to Westphalia nation states and their particular modes of government, legitimacy and representativeness.

The concept of governance disappeared in the 16th century with the emergence of the state, because the two notions “governance” and “government” are profoundly different.

Governance is a decision-making process that — through consultation, dialogue, exchange and mutual respect — seeks to ensure coexistence and, in some cases, coherence between different and sometimes divergent points of view.

This involves seeking some common ground and extending it to the point where joint action can be envisaged. Globalization, for its part, reveals a new sphere of common interests that transcends states, cultures and national histories.

We need to go beyond the classical inter-nations system. Indeed, the disproportion between the enforcement role of states and their actual capacity to handle issues calls for new forms of governance.

As with any system of power within the nation-state, what is needed is "good" global governance — that is, a system that offers a good balance between efficiency and legitimacy, adapted to this new universal context.

What then are the specific challenges of global governance as opposed to the classical systems of national governance ?

In my view, elements of legitimacy must be based on institutions and procedures. Classical legitimacy entails citizens choosing their representatives collectively by voting for them.

The term "governance" was first used in 12th century France. As with the word government, it comes from the Latin word for “rudder,” conveying the idea of “steering.”

But it also relies on the political capacity of the system to bring forward public discourse and proposals that produce coherent majorities and provide citizens with the feeling that they can debate the issues.

In other words, the political system must represent the society, and allow it to see itself as a whole, with all its members using the same language and experiencing the same feelings.

Since legitimacy depends on the closeness of the relationship between the individual and the decision-making process, the first challenge of global governance is distance.

The other legitimacy challenge refers to the so-called democratic deficit and the accountability deficit, which arise when there are no means for individuals to challenge international decision-making.

Although transparency remains crucial to ensure that governments are both accountable and challengeable at home, classical definitions of domestic accountability and democracy cannot be simply transposed and applied in the international institutions context.

We have to explore how to ensure that citizens have the feeling that they belong, that they can influence the choices made by their society — and that they can recognize themselves in their representatives.

Classical definitions of domestic accountability and democracy cannot be simply applied in the international institutions context.

The specific challenge of legitimacy in global governance is therefore to deal with the perceived too distant, non-accountable and non-directly challengeable decision-making at the international level.

The second element in the validation of power is efficiency. Citizens expect governments to be able to identify the problems and expect results from institutions with political responsibilities. But quantifying efficiency in concrete terms is not easy. When power is remote and when there are multiple levels of government, the task becomes even more complicated.

The first efficiency challenge of any global governance system stems from the fact that the classical Westphalian order is based on the full sovereignty monopoly of nation states.

We must find ways to address the opposition from sovereign nation-states who resist more or less intensely – depending on the state and on the subject matter – transferring or sharing with international institutions their jurisdiction over certain matters.

The second specific challenge is that of the lack of coherence among international institutions. Even when traditional state power is (partly)

Citizens expect governments to be able to identify the problems and expect results from institutions with political responsibilities.

transferred to an international institution, it is handed over only to very specialized international institutions whose mandates are limited and whose direction/instructions come solely from nation-states' authorities.

As the saying goes, "coherence begins at home." It lies first and foremost with states. But we all know that states are often not coherent and do not act coherently, so how can the actions of their institutions be coherent?

The overall specific efficiency challenge of global governance is to deal with partial and incoherent efficiency.

Handling global problems in relying on classical models of domestic democracy has important limitations. Yet, we need to ensure feelings of legitimacy and efficiency otherwise citizens will lose trust in their local/national government if transnational issues that affect them daily cannot be adequately dealt with.