Global governance, technological innovation, and the new wave of protectionism.

There are numerous contemporary challenges to global governance in a scenario of technological acceleration and increasing fragmentation of multilateralism. Innovation in areas such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and renewable energies is crucial for shaping the world economy, but it faces the obstacle of a new wave of protectionism, symbolized by Donald Trump's second term in the United States. 

What do we mean by global governance?

The expression global governance Global governance refers to the set of norms, institutions, processes, and practices that seek to regulate issues of international scope in a world characterized by interdependence. Unlike a "world government," which does not exist, global governance operates through networks of cooperation—formal and informal—between states, international organizations (such as the UN, WTO, IMF), transnational corporations, and civil society actors. Its objective is to coordinate actions on issues that transcend national borders, such as trade, finance, the environment, security, and, more recently, science and technology. However, global governance is far from neutral: it reflects power struggles, economic interests, and asymmetries between central and peripheral countries, which is why it has become one of the major contemporary debates in the social and economic sciences.

Technological innovation as a global productive force

The 21st century has brought a radical transformation to the productive base of the international economy. The globalization of innovation has become the new engine of economic growth, with sectors such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biomedicine, robotics, and renewable energies shaping the future of production and trade.

UNCTAD (2023) highlights that “green technologies could generate trillion-dollar markets by 2030, but unequal access to them tends to reinforce the international division of labor.”

China has advocated for an open innovation ecosystem, in which integration into global networks accelerates the transition to new forms of productive development. This model contrasts with the trend of fragmentation that is intensifying in several advanced economies.

Trump's protectionism and the crisis of multilateralism

Donald Trump's second term (2025–) consolidated a strategy of trade confrontation on a planetary scale. Expanded tariffs against China, India, Brazil, Mexico, the European Union, and half the world have affected not only industrial sectors but also digital supply chains and data flows, configuring what Paul Krugman called a "multi-front currency and tariff war." Dan Rodrik, another internationally recognized economist, argues that the current crisis reveals that "hyper-financialized" globalization has not generated mechanisms for social compensation, opening space for policies of closure.

The effects of this wave of protectionism are already being felt: increased imported inflation, disruption of global value chains, and instability in foreign direct investment flows. 

Donald Trump used technological barriers as a geopolitical tool, restricting exports of semiconductors, telecommunications equipment, and green technologies to countries considered rivals. This is a move that not only questions the WTO but also weakens international scientific and technological cooperation.

The shortcomings of the Western model and the search for alternatives.

The protectionist wave also reflects the limits of the Western modernization model. J. Stiglitz, another Nobel laureate in Economics, points out that, after decades of neoliberal hegemony, advanced economies face deindustrialization, increasing inequality, and financial instability. This exhaustion drives policies that prioritize immediate gains at the expense of multilateral cooperation.

On the other hand, alternative governance initiatives are emerging, such as the BRICS efforts to expand autonomous financing mechanisms and promote South-South technological cooperation. By emphasizing equality and shared benefits, these arrangements may represent a response to the shortcomings of the current order, even if they face limitations in scale and coordination.

Global governance at a crossroads

Global governance faces two paths. The first, marked by unilateralism and fragmentation, deepens structural tensions and limits the diffusion of technological innovations crucial for the energy and digital transition. The second, based on openness, cooperation, and sustainability, could revitalize multilateralism and offer joint responses to the climate crisis and productive reorganization.

Recent experience shows that existing mechanisms—WTO, IMF, World Bank—no longer offer adequate solutions. As Rodrik proposes, a “reimagining of globalization” is needed that allows for greater autonomy for national development policies, but which, at the same time, preserves mechanisms for global coordination in strategic areas such as science, technology, and climate.

What to aim for

Donald Trump's second term illustrates the risks of a fragmented international order, in which technological innovation is treated as a geopolitical weapon rather than a global public good. To prevent the next decade from being marked by a permanent economic war, it is urgent to strengthen multilateral institutions, create new forms of governance, and promote cooperation that goes beyond the immediate interests of individual powers.

Global governance in the 21st century will be defined by its ability to integrate innovation, sustainability, and equity. The challenge lies in transforming technological innovation into a driver of cooperation, not an instrument of exclusion. The international order needs to be reconfigured based on equality, openness, and cooperation, or risk further deepening the asymmetries between the center and the periphery.