Rethinking governance for a changing world

Governance, and how to improve it, is a vital issue that affects every citizen because it gets to the heart of how we organize ourselves as communities, companies and as a society to achieve our most basic objectives. The issue of governance, the process by which decisions are made and implemented, is as old as civilization itself.

由于公司的可持续性已从关注竞彩足球app怎么下载合规，风险管理和成本降低转变为通过产品和服务创新以及资源消费和效率优化的旨在增长和品牌差异化的战略，因此对治理的过渡有相应的需求。具有讽刺意味的是，在越来越过时的情况下，对治理的关注只有适度的关注。

Governance is practiced today in one of three principal ways: through top-down hierarchies (command and control) characteristic of governmental bodies and many corporations; through networks such as markets where buyers and sellers agree on price levels and other conditions for transactions of specific products and services; and through collaborative partnerships where individuals, groups or institutions find common cause to achieve specific goals that none can separately attain. Within specific organizations, such as government agencies or corporations that must reconcile many kinds of economic and social objectives, all three types of governance can operate simultaneously. These objectives can range from complying with corporate financial disclosure requirements, improving air quality, participating in local land use decisions, or managing the diverse participants in a global supply chain.

Much of the current focus on governance deals with the management of individual issues or processes within large established institutions. This approach to governance is being fundamentally disrupted and transformed. Three major factors explain this disruption: 1) the growing scale and complexity of governance challenges where impacts can be global, regional and local simultaneously (think turbulence in the financial markets); 2) the emergence of system-level challenges that defy the jurisdictions or capabilities of institutions (consider the interrelationships involving climate change, the exacerbation of drought or flood conditions and the availability of water supplies for drinking or food production); and 3) the near-instantaneous availability of information to citizens (see the immediate reaction of customers who do not wish to pay higher access fees for banking services).

All three factors are now in play in the evaluation of how to make the New York metropolitan region, and other major population centers around the world, more resilient to future storm surges or sea level rise. Should residents of flood damaged or destroyed properties rebuild on the same sites that may again be vulnerable, and receive flood insurance backed by taxpayers? Should a sea wall be constructed to protect against future storm surges or should wetlands be enhanced to create natural barriers to rising water levels? Should power generation and distribution systems be relocated and building codes modified? How can local, state and federal officials, as well as the private sector, non-governmental organizations and individual citizens, have a voice in answering these and other questions?

一个类似的例子涉及负责管理七国科罗拉多河流域的众多组织。通过美国开垦和水资源局催化的联盟，该过程已经发展为获得系统级别的知识，以应对西方用水面临的无数挑战。通过在自上而下和自下而上的时尚中，政府机构，地方和区域饮水机构，美洲原住民，商业社区，娱乐活动，非政府组织，气候科学家和消费者都有更好的信息来做出和协调一致的信息，以协调一致科罗拉多河未来用户的最大利益，有当前的需求。

关于保护粮食供应，公共基础设施的投资，权利支出，预防肥胖和全球环境条件的投资也存在类似的系统级挑战。

所有这些挑战的联系是它们从单个问题转变为问题系统。需要的是系统层面对发生经济，环境和社会变化的互连性的理解。目前，政府政策制定者，企业高管和个人公民通常不会以这种方式解决问题。相反，我们的方法类似于坑洼管理：当一个修补时，事实是在事实之后确定的。其他组织，例如多边发展机构，非政府组织或私人基金会，即使坑洼人口不断加速，也正在尝试以更快的速度修补坑洼。

向前迈出的主要一步是提高治理，以便与我们面临的问题的系统级规模相匹配。One example of system level governance recently was announced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that proposes to regulate food safety and quality across the entire value chain of agricultural enterprises responsible for providing fresh fruits and vegetables on America’s tables rather than responding, in ambulance-like fashion, to health incidents that already have occurred. As a result, growers, packagers, retailers and other enterprises involved in the agricultural chain of custody will, in the future, have a series of individual responsibilities (such as ensuring that irrigation water met certain standards, preventing bacterial contamination of fresh food, providing toilet and washroom facilities for agricultural workers and maintaining records and plans for managing contamination incidents) as part of a comprehensive system of information and management that will be more transparent to all, including consumers. Under this system, targeted regulation can co-exist with and support a market-based system.

This example of system level governance embodies three critical attributes: 1) investing in data collection and information technologies that makes for a “smarter” decision making process by obtaining a system-level view of the problems rather than focusing on one issue or constituency at a time; 2) modifying governance processes to enable participants to respond to big picture needs as well individual issues of immediate concern; and 3) providing greater power to consumers to alter their own behaviors and choices by making available more relevant and timely information.

系统级治理并没有创造新的决策层次，还可以使公民，机构和公司的网络更好地了解其他参与者的期望，需求和能力。它还避免了建立具有全球监管权力的政府机构的提议的缺点；这些建议已被证明缺乏一系列政治体系和文化的信誉和合法性。重新思考治理意味着通过网络系统重新分配权威和责任，在这种系统中，对错误决定的问责制变得与做出的好选择一样明显。

Boardroom image by hxdbzxy viaShutterstock。