Governance in a fragmenting world: event round up

The international rules-based order is under increasing strain. But what does this mean for governance, anti-corruption and accountability reform?

This question framed a public panel hosted by SOAS Anti-Corruption Evidence (SOAS ACE) and the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), bringing together perspectives from economics, development, governance and public policy to explore how shifting geopolitical realities are reshaping the international landscape.

Anna Bossman, Former Director of Integrity and Anti-Corruption, African Development Bank; former Ghanaian Ambassador to France (keynote)
Joe Powell MP, UK Member of Parliament and former Deputy CEO, Open Government Partnership
Mushtaq Khan, Professor of Economics, SOAS University of London
Jonathan Papoulidis, Vice President, Food for the Hungry
Pallavi Roy, Professor of International Economics, SOAS University of London (Moderator)

The full discussion is available to watch online. Below, we highlight some of the key ideas and debates that emerged during the event.

The international rules-based order is fragmenting – but it was never as universal as often claimed

The panel shared a broad consensus that the international rules-based order is undergoing a period of significant fragmentation. Among the key drivers identified were the decline of Western dominance, the rise of China and other emerging powers, intensifying geopolitical competition between China and the United States, the weakening of multilateral institutions, and reduced external pressure on governments to maintain governance, anti-corruption and accountability standards.

Speakers recognised that the existing order helped establish important international norms around anti-corruption, transparency, accountability and human rights. It also provided a degree of predictability in international relations, meaning that the weakening of these structures is creating greater uncertainty.

At the same time, however, the discussion challenged assumptions that the old system had been universally beneficial. Mushtaq Khan argued that the rules-based order reflected the interests of advanced economies and was built on liberal market principles that benefited countries already possessing productive and technological advantages. Several speakers noted that many developing countries experienced “good governance” agendas as mechanisms for enforcing financial discipline rather than supporting structural transformation.

As the existing order continues to fragment, the question is therefore not simply what is being lost, but what kind of international system may emerge in its place.

A new era of strategic competition is reshaping the international landscape

The discussion highlighted the emergence of a new era of strategic competition. Speakers pointed to growing rivalry between major powers over technology, energy, strategic infrastructure and critical minerals, alongside the return of industrial policy in both the United States and Europe.

Jonathan Papoulidis argued that this fragmentation should not necessarily be seen as an anomaly, but rather as the natural consequence of countries developing greater economic and political power within the previous international system. The challenge now is understanding how governance and development strategies need to adapt to this changing distribution of power.

The key challenge is resilience, not efficiency

A recurring theme was the need to move from an efficiency-based model to a resilience-based one.

Jonathan Papoulidis described today’s world as facing a “polycrisis” characterised by conflict, climate shocks, pandemics, food insecurity and economic volatility. In this context, resilience means not only absorbing shocks but also adapting and transforming institutions and economies as conditions change.

The discussion highlighted China’s investment in industrial capabilities, strategic reserves and alternative supply arrangements as one example of how countries are seeking to build resilience in an increasingly uncertain world.

Productive capabilities matter more than governance checklists

Mushtaq Khan argued that governance reform alone does not generate development. Instead, countries need productive capabilities, industrial development, technological upgrading and broad-based employment opportunities.

The discussion suggested that sustainable governance depends on creating productive and inclusive economies, rather than relying on governance checklists or procedural reforms alone. Speakers also reflected on the experience of advanced economies, including the UK, noting concerns about declining productive capacity, rising inequality and increasing concentrations of wealth.

A more uncertain future brings both risks and opportunities

The panel also explored the risks associated with a more fragmented international order, including increased corruption, state capture, authoritarianism and geopolitical conflict. Joe Powell highlighted declining trust in democratic institutions in the UK and elsewhere, arguing that strengthening domestic accountability will be essential to rebuilding public confidence.

Participants also questioned whether multilateral institutions are adapting quickly enough to changing geopolitical realities, suggesting that many continue to operate according to assumptions that no longer reflect the distribution of power in today’s world.

Despite these challenges, the discussion ended on a cautiously optimistic note. Rather than seeking to restore the previous international order, speakers pointed towards the need for more representative international rules, greater resilience, productive and inclusive economies, and new coalitions capable of addressing shared challenges in a more fragmented world.