b'SINCE YOU ASKEDBY: NIELS LOUWAARSWHATS WRONG WITH INTERNATIONAL GOVERNANCE THESE DAYS?T he early 1990s saw a host of inter-national agreements, from WTO withitsTRIPS(Intellectual Property), SPS (Phyto), and also AoA, GATS, GATT, TBT and TRIMs, and related ASEAN and NAFTA trade deals, to Conventions on Biological Diversity (CBD), Chemicals (CC of ILO), Climate (UNFCCC), Desertification (UNCCD), Nuclear Arms (TPNW) and many more. It is interesting to note that these agreements were part of the globalisation chapter of the neo-liberal philosophy, spurred by Reagan and Thatcher at the time. It was realised that the free trade goal for which WTO was established required internationally agreed rules, both within the trade area such as TRIPS and SPS, but also in other policy domains, creating a more level playing field.on the IT PGRFA did not speak of conser- is more difficult than arguing against the International cooperation was also deemedvation and hardly about access to geneticdigging of them. Such ideas will not sprout necessary to cope with global threats andresources. COPs spend most of their timefrom the COPs where government officials opportunities, such as those related to cli- discussing money rather than the topics forgo to speak their positions defined in their mate change and biodiversity. which they were primarily established.capital cities, and similarly, the lobbyists The governance of these agreementsThe global circuses around the interna- fight for their turf.requires Conference of the Parties (COPs)tional agreements have grown out of hand.Would it not be much more productive and Governing Bodies (GBs) to implementIt seems to have become an interesting life- to try to bring together stakeholders with them, and to adapt them to changing condi- style and even a living for a large number ofdiverse positions not during but between tions over time. These grew into enormousgovernment negotiators and a host of NGOthe big circus events, somewhat out of the happenings with, next to the parties (gov- and industry lobbyists, travelling the worldlimelight, in a safe space where Chatham ernments), a host of observer-delegationswithas we see nowamazingly little pro- House Rules are the rule. The seed sector, of interested parties. They organise sidegress! One may even question whether theyconsisting of ISF, several NGOs and gov-events and lobby in the corridors and inall have an equal interest in resolving theernments are attempting to do exactly some cases also in the negotiation rooms tomain issues at hand or whether some have athat in what is called the Seeds for Food influence the ongoing negotiations.personal interest in extending the processes.Coalition. The aim is to create a coalition What has happened to the positiveWhy are so many lobbyists going toof the willing who are really interested geopolitical thinking 30 years later? Freethe COPs and GBs? I wonder whetherin understanding each other and create trade quite suddenly came under severefocusing on the COPs and GBs is the mostsolutions to the stalemates. It is not easy pressure now that trade is a major item ineffective way of lobbying. The high pressto organise such a platform, first because the newly developing international rela- and social media coverage forces parties toindividuals have to be identified who may tions with growing geo-political tensions.defend strong positions leading to manywant to take partthey have to get an OK Individual countries and blocks are comingdelegations getting into a controversy ratherfrom their bosses in governments, NGOs in an opposing rather than cooperating rolethan a collaboration mode. Despite all theand industry organisations, and then there on trade issues. Along with that, financialside events during the meetings, many ofinevitably have to be funds to get together support to important UN-organisationswhich claim to want to bridge the divide,to build the personal relations and trust that is withdrawn. In addition, an alreadymost are attended by participants withinwill allow to digitally meet in small groups. developing process of stagnation of otherthe respective bubbles.If we are serious about global govern-conventions is now risking of coming to aThe negative vibes that dominate theance taking steps forward, we need to sup-grinding halt. What happened to the highvarious international forums are in urgentport such emerging coalitions. hopes around jointly dealing with the globalneed of visionary eyes towards alternatives. threats? Such visionaries will have a more difficultEditors Note: Niels Louwaars is a Seed World As illustration: the Belm meetingtask towards breaking the spell comparedEurope columnist and Seed Systems Specialist. on climate change did not speak aboutto the individuals that stood out in theThis is an abbreviated version. For the full reducing emissions to slow down the rate1980s and 90s and created the collaborativeversion see https://www.seedworld.com/of change; global plastic talks in Genevaactions defined in the international agree- europe/2026/02/01/whats-wrong-with-in-ended in a deadlock, and the Lima meetingments. Pulling people out of their trenchesternational-governance-these-days/FEBRUARY 2026|SEEDWORLD.COM/EUROPEISEED WORLD EUROPE I 27'