Edexcel A-Level Politics 9PL0 · Paper 3 Global · Content area 2 of 6

2. Global governance: political and economic

2.1 political (the UN, NATO) · 2.2 economic (IMF, World Bank, WTO, G7/G20, poverty) · 2.3 addressing issues, reform and non-state actors.
← All areasPurple = thinker · Orange = example
Every bar below is a drop-down and starts closed. Click one to open it.
Progress
Political governance
2.1.1 The United Nations (UN)

Essential The central political body of global governance.

The specification
2.1.1The United Nations (UN)
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Origins and development of the UN, including its 1945 charter.
Role and significance of the UN to include the Security Council, General Assembly, Economic and Social Council, International Court of Justice including their strengths and weaknesses.
Strengths - I can argue these
Weaknesses - I can argue these
Security Council
General Assembly
Economic and Social Council
International Court of Justice

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2025 Q1A (similarities between the UN Security Council and NATO); 2021 Q1B (differences between NATO and the UN).
  • Partially: 2023 Q3C (UN addressed human rights more than the environment); 2020 Q3A (global governance more economic than human rights).
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2023 Q1A (ICJ and ICC differences).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: judge effectiveness organ by organ, not the UN as a single thing.
  • Weaker: describe the structure with no evaluation of the veto.
  • Misconception: treating General Assembly votes as binding.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: the veto both protects great-power buy-in and paralyses action.
  • Evidence: Russia vetoing Ukraine resolutions; US vetoes on Israel; inaction in Rwanda 1994; paralysis over Syria and the US-Israel-Iran war (2026).
  • Level 5: weighs legitimacy against effectiveness and reaches a clear verdict.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Is the UN effective at maintaining peace and security?

Yes

  • Point. The UN has a legitimacy that no other body can match. Explanation. It can authorise international action and it sets the norms that states are expected to follow. Example. Its near-universal membership means almost every state in the world belongs to it. Evaluation. However, legitimacy on its own achieves little without the power to enforce decisions.
  • Point. The UN's wider work beyond hard security often succeeds. Explanation. The UN is much more than the Security Council, and its other organs and agencies deliver real results. Example. The work of the WHO on Covid-19, peacekeeping missions and aid programmes all show this wider role. Evaluation. Even so, this record becomes patchy on the hardest cases.

No

  • Point. The veto paralyses the Security Council. Explanation. No action can be taken against a P5 state or one of its allies, because the veto blocks it. Example. The deadlock over Syria shows this clearly. Evaluation. This weakness is structural, built into the UN's design, not an occasional failure.
  • Point. The UN has no army of its own. Explanation. It cannot compel powerful states to do anything they do not want to do. Example. For troops and resources it relies on what member states choose to provide. Evaluation. This weakness matters most in exactly the cases where great powers are involved.
Best judgement. The UN is effective on soft issues and legitimacy but is hostage to the veto on hard security, so the verdict splits by organ and issue.
Using it in essays
  • 12-mark: similarities and differences between the UN and NATO.
  • 30-mark: is global governance more concerned with economic than human-rights issues; has the UN addressed human rights more than the environment.
  • Topic sentence: "The UN supplies legitimacy that no other body can, but the veto means it acts only when the great powers allow."
Wider context
Helpful context

The Security Council reflects the 1945 victors, which is why reform pressure (adding India, Brazil, Africa) recurs but never passes: the P5 will not give up the veto.

Examination priority

Essential The UN is the spine of the political-governance questions and a constant comparison partner.

2.1.2 NATO

Important The main security organisation, with a changing post-Cold-War role.

The specification
2.1.2North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Role and significance of NATO including its changing role, particularly since the end of the Cold War, and strengths and weaknesses.
Strengths - I can argue these
Weaknesses - I can argue these

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2025 Q1A (UN Security Council and NATO similarities); 2021 Q1B (NATO and UN differences).
  • Partially: conflict and security strands of the 30-mark questions.
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: use the changing role since 1990 as the analytical thread.
  • Weaker: describe NATO as a Cold-War relic without the post-2014 revival.
  • Misconception: confusing NATO (military alliance) with the UN (universal body).
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: NATO is more effective than the UN at hard security because it has force and its adversaries hold no veto, though members must still agree by consensus.
  • Evidence: Kosovo 1999; Finland and Sweden joining (2023-24).
  • Level 5: balances effectiveness against the charge of provoking Russia.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Is NATO still relevant and effective?

Yes

  • Point. NATO has real military force and unity among its members. Explanation. Because it has armed force at its disposal, it can act in situations where the UN cannot. Example. The Kosovo intervention and its support for Ukraine both show this. Evaluation. Its effectiveness still depends on continued US commitment to the alliance.
  • Point. NATO is still expanding. Explanation. States continue to seek membership because they want the protection the alliance offers. Example. Finland and Sweden have both joined. Evaluation. On the other hand, this growth raises Russian hostility towards the alliance.

No

  • Point. NATO provokes the very insecurity it is meant to prevent. Explanation. This is the security dilemma in action: steps one side takes to feel safer make the other side feel threatened. Example. Russia cites NATO enlargement as a justification for its actions over Ukraine. Evaluation. This argument is contested, because Russia's choices remain its own responsibility.
  • Point. Disputes over burden-sharing weaken the alliance. Explanation. NATO's unity is fragile and has to be bought at a price, with members arguing over who pays for collective defence. Example. US pressure on member spending led to the 2025 Hague summit pledge of 5 per cent of GDP on defence and security by 2035. Evaluation. The alliance has held together under this pressure so far, and the new pledge shows it adapting rather than splitting.
Best judgement. NATO is more effective than the UN at hard security and is expanding, but its strength feeds the very rivalry it manages.
Using it in essays
  • 12-mark: compare the role and significance of NATO and the UN.
  • Topic sentence: "Far from fading after the Cold War, NATO has expanded, which shows both its value and its capacity to provoke."
Wider context
Helpful context

NATO and the UN make a clean pairing: NATO has teeth but no universal legitimacy; the UN has legitimacy but no teeth.

Examination priority

Important A frequent 12-mark comparison partner with the UN.

Economic governance
2.2.1 The IMF and the World Bank

Essential The Bretton Woods financial institutions.

The specification
2.2.1International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Role and significance of these institutions, including their strengths and weaknesses.
Strengths - I can argue these
Weaknesses - I can argue these

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2024 Q1B (weaknesses of both the IMF and the World Bank); Sample Q1A (criticisms of the IMF and the World Bank).
  • Partially: 2023 Q3A (economic globalisation and poverty); 2020 Q3A (economic vs human-rights focus).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: weigh stabilisation and development against Western dominance and the cost of conditions.
  • Weaker: list functions; confuse the IMF (crisis lending) with the World Bank (development).
  • Praised: dependency theory used to frame the criticism.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited (against): Western-dominated voting; SAPs impose austerity; one-size-fits-all reform.
  • Evidence: IMF conditionality in Greece 2010-12; Argentina 2018: a 57 billion dollar bailout, the largest in IMF history, with austerity conditions; World Bank IDA water access.
  • Level 5: separates the IMF and the World Bank and reaches a verdict on each.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Do the IMF and World Bank do more harm than good?

They help

  • Point. The IMF and World Bank prevent economic collapse. Explanation. By keeping economies stable they protect everyone, including the poor, from the damage a crash would cause. Example. IMF crisis lending to states in financial trouble shows this role. Evaluation. However, the terms attached to that lending can deepen hardship for ordinary people.
  • Point. They fund long-term development. Explanation. This produces real gains in living standards for millions of people. Example. World Bank IDA projects on clean water and health show these gains. Evaluation. The benefits are uneven, with some regions gaining far more than others.

They harm

  • Point. The conditions attached to loans cause real harm. Explanation. Conditionality demands austerity, and austerity falls hardest on the poorest people. Example. Structural Adjustment Programmes have forced governments to cut welfare spending. Evaluation. Defenders reply that some reform is necessary if an economy is to recover.
  • Point. Both institutions are under Western control. Explanation. Critics argue they serve the interests of the developed core rather than the countries they lend to. Example. Voting power is weighted in favour of the US. Evaluation. This dominance is now being challenged by the AIIB as an alternative source of finance.
Best judgement. Both stabilise and develop but on Western terms; the harm lies less in their existence than in the conditions attached, which is why China's no-strings model appeals.
Using it in essays
  • 12-mark: weaknesses of, or criticisms of, both the IMF and the World Bank.
  • Topic sentence: "The Bretton Woods bodies stabilise and develop, but on terms that critics say lock poorer states into dependence."
Wider context
Helpful context

The IMF/World Bank criticism is the bridge from Area 1 (dependency, North-South divide) into reform debates and the rise of the AIIB.

Examination priority

Essential A recurring 12-mark target and the heart of the poverty debate.

2.2.2 The WTO, G7/G8 and G20

Important Trade governance and the great-power economic clubs.

The specification
2.2.2The World Trade Organisation (WTO) and G7/G8 and G20
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Role and significance of these institutions, including their strengths and weaknesses.
Strengths - I can argue these
Weaknesses - I can argue these

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2019 Q1A (criticisms of the WTO and the G7/8); 2022 Q1A (similarities between the G7 and G20).
  • Partially: 2022 Q3C (regional bodies more impact than the IMF, World Bank and WTO).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: distinguish the WTO (rules) from the Gs (informal coordination).
  • Weaker: treat all economic bodies as interchangeable.
  • Misconception: assuming the G20 is a formal institution with binding power.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: the G20 is more representative but lacks teeth; the WTO has rules but cannot enforce them now.
  • Evidence: Appellate Body paralysis; G20 in 2008.
  • Level 5: judges representation against effectiveness.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Is global economic governance effective?

Yes

  • Point. Agreed rules lower the risk of conflict between states. Explanation. Shared rules make trade predictable, so states are less likely to fall out over it. Example. The WTO dispute system once resolved trade wars before they escalated. Evaluation. That system has been undermined since 2019.
  • Point. These bodies can coordinate states in a crisis. Explanation. Acting together, they averted a far deeper economic slump. Example. The G20's coordinated response in 2008 is the clearest case. Evaluation. The G20 has shown much less unity since then.

No

  • Point. Enforcement of the trade rules has collapsed. Explanation. Rules carry little weight when there is no referee left to apply them. Example. The WTO's Appellate Body has been blocked and cannot function. Evaluation. The result is that powerful states can simply ignore the rules.
  • Point. The G7 and G20 are informal clubs rather than true institutions. Explanation. They produce talk and joint statements, not law. Example. Nothing they agree has any binding power over their members. Evaluation. Even so, they still set the agenda for the global economy.
Best judgement. Economic governance still shapes the agenda but has lost enforcement bite, which is why regional and rival bodies are gaining ground.
Using it in essays
  • 12-mark: criticisms of the WTO and the G7/8; similarities between the G7 and G20.
  • Topic sentence: "Economic governance still convenes the powerful, but the WTO's loss of enforcement shows its declining grip."
Wider context
Helpful context

The G20's inclusion of China, India and Brazil mirrors the wider shift to multipolarity (Area 4).

Examination priority

Important Reliable 12-mark territory; the WTO's decline is a current, high-value point.

2.2.3 Economic governance and poverty

Essential How global economic governance deals with poverty, and the theories behind it.

The specification
2.2.3Significance of how global economic governance deals with the issue of poverty
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
The North-South divide and other measurements to include world-systems theory, dependency, orthodox and alternative measurements of poverty.
Classical economic development theory, structural theory, neo-classical development theory.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2023 Q3A (economic globalisation has significantly reduced poverty).
  • Partially: 2020 Q3A and 2022 Q3C (the economic governance bodies and global issues).
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2023 Mock Q3C (reducing poverty versus protecting the environment).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: engage the operative term (significantly) and use data on both sides.
  • Weaker: answer good or bad rather than significantly.
  • Praised: dependency and world-systems theory deployed as the counter-frame.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited (agree): IMF/WTO/World Bank, free trade, falling extreme poverty in China and India.
  • Credited (counter): Western dominance, uneven development, sub-Saharan Africa, dependency theory.
  • Level 5: weighs the qualifier and reaches a reasoned verdict.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Has global economic governance significantly reduced poverty?

Yes

  • Point. Trade-led growth has cut poverty. Explanation. Opening markets to trade lifts incomes as economies grow. Example. China and India have seen huge falls in poverty since 2001. Evaluation. These gains are heavily concentrated in East Asia rather than spread across the world.
  • Point. Targeted development work has improved lives. Explanation. Projects that provide clean water and better health tackle the worst effects of poverty directly. Example. The World Bank's IDA funds this kind of work. Evaluation. Its reach is patchy, so many of the poorest are still missed.

No, not significantly

  • Point. Development has been deeply uneven. Explanation. The gains from economic growth have bypassed the poorest regions. Example. Sub-Saharan Africa has largely been left behind. Evaluation. This is a strong argument against the word "significantly" in the question.
  • Point. Dependency theory argues that the system itself keeps poor states poor. Explanation. The global economy is structured to favour the rich core countries. Example. Structural Adjustment Programmes and the core-periphery structure both illustrate this. Evaluation. The theory is contested, because Asian states have managed to catch up within the same system.
Best judgement. Global economic governance has cut absolute poverty, but whether significantly turns on East Asia rather than the developing world as a whole.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: economic globalisation has significantly reduced poverty.
  • Topic sentence: "Economic governance has cut absolute poverty, but unevenly, so the verdict depends on whether East Asia is treated as the rule or the exception."
Wider context
Helpful context

Structural Adjustment Programmes (reduce the state, low taxes, fewer trade barriers, follow Western policy) and the Washington Consensus are the orthodox model dependency theory attacks.

Examination priority

Essential The poverty essay is a recurrent 30-mark title.

Across both: reform and effectiveness
2.3 Addressing contemporary issues, reform and non-state actors

Important What stops these bodies working, and the role of NGOs.

The specification
2.3The ways and extent to which these institutions address and resolve contemporary global issues
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
how the following prevents the UN Security Council from effectively addressing and resolving the issues above: the membership and structure; the use of veto
how the following prevents the IMF and World Bank from effectively addressing and resolving the issues above
pressure for reform and criticism, including Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAPs), global economic crisis.
2.3.2The role and significance of the global civil society and non-state actors
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
The role and significance of the global civil society and non-state actors, including non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in addressing and resolving the issues above.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: the 'address and resolve' strand runs through 2020 Q3A, 2023 Q3C and 2022 Q3C.
  • Partially: NGO and civil-society points strengthen any global-governance essay.
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2024 Q3C (united or divided on human rights); 2023 Mock Q3C (poverty versus the environment); 2025 Q3A (regional organisations addressing global issues).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: name the structural blocker (veto, voting weights) rather than saying the body is 'weak'.
  • Weaker: ignore non-state actors entirely.
  • Praised: NGOs used as evidence that governance is not only states.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: reform is blocked by those who benefit from the status quo (the P5, the major IMF shareholders).
  • Evidence: stalled Security Council reform; sanctions on Russia evaded by China and India.
  • Level 5: links the blockers to the wider shift to multipolarity.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark Examine questions (Q1). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each one comparing the two named items directly. An answer that discusses only one of the two named items is capped at Level 1.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Can global governance institutions be reformed to work better?

Yes

  • Point. The pressure for reform is real. Explanation. The case for change is widely accepted across the international community. Example. There are long-standing reform proposals for the Security Council and for IMF voting. Evaluation. These proposals are blocked by the states that benefit from the current set-up.
  • Point. Non-state actors fill the gaps that institutions leave. Explanation. They show that global governance involves more than just states. Example. NGOs and global civil society take on work the formal bodies do not do. Evaluation. Their weakness is that they lack any hard power of their own.

No

  • Point. Vetoes protect the status quo. Explanation. States rarely vote to cut their own power, so those who hold vetoes use them to keep things as they are. Example. Security Council reform always stalls for exactly this reason. Evaluation. This is a structural problem, built into the design of the institutions themselves.
  • Point. Rival bodies simply bypass the need for reform. Explanation. States that cannot change the existing institutions choose exit rather than reform, building alternatives of their own. Example. The AIIB and BRICS are the leading cases. Evaluation. The danger is that this fragments global governance rather than improving it.
Best judgement. Reform is needed and widely backed but blocked by those who benefit, so change is coming through rival institutions rather than through the existing ones.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: any 'how effectively does global governance address X' question.
  • Topic sentence: "These bodies fail less from weakness than from design: the veto and the voting weights protect the very states that block reform."
Wider context
Helpful context

The rise of the AIIB, BRICS and Belt and Road is reform by exit: states route around institutions they cannot change.

Examination priority

Important The reform-and-effectiveness strand appears in most 30-mark governance titles.

Map Timeline (interactive roller)
Helpful context

How the architecture of global governance was built and then challenged. Useful for any 'how effective is global governance' essay.

Roll through the timeline1 / 7
1944Bretton Woods
1945UN
1949NATO
1995WTO
1999G20
2008Crisis
2014AIIB
1944

Bretton Woods. The IMF and World Bank are created to stabilise finance and fund recovery, on liberal-economic lines led by the US.

1945

The United Nations. The Charter builds a rules-based order around the Security Council, with the P5 veto baked in.

1949

NATO. A collective-defence alliance for the Cold War, later reinvented for out-of-area intervention and enlargement.

1995

The WTO. Replaces GATT with binding trade rules and a dispute-settlement system.

1999

The G20. Founded after the Asian crisis, it brings emerging economies into economic coordination.

2008

Global financial crisis. The G20 coordinates a response, but the crisis exposes how integrated and fragile the system is.

2014

The AIIB and Belt and Road. China builds rival, no-strings institutions: governance starts to fragment toward multipolarity.

Roll up and down: the arrows, scroll or swipe inside the box, the up and down keys, or click a year above. Full interactive timeline on Panther →

Diag Diagram: the UN Security Council and the veto
The Security Council: 15 seats, but only 5 that matter most USAVETO UKVETO FranceVETO RussiaVETO ChinaVETO 10 elected members - two-year terms, no veto P5: permanent, veto-holding, fixed since 1945 Vetoes cast since 2011 (approximate counts) Russia30+ China12 USA7 UK0 France0 Russia: mostly Syria and Ukraine. USA: mostly resolutions on Israel, including Gaza ceasefires 2023-24. UK and France: none since 1989. One P5 "no" kills any resolution. February 2022: Russia vetoed action on its own invasion of Ukraine.

Exam use: the picture makes both sides of the UN debate. FOR effectiveness: 15 members, binding powers, the only body that can authorise force. AGAINST: the five navy seats are frozen in 1945 and any one of them can stop everything.

Plan Where the essays come from

Each row takes an evaluative demand the specification makes in this area, quoted word for word, and shows the 30-mark question it tends to become. Learn both sides for every row.

The spec wordingThe question this becomesThe two sides in one line
"Role and significance of the UN"Evaluate the view that the United Nations is no longer fit for purpose.Yes: the Security Council veto freezes action whenever a great power objects. No: it remains the only universal forum and its agencies deliver real results.
"Role and significance of NATO including its changing role"Evaluate the view that NATO is still essential to the security of its members.Yes: Ukraine has renewed collective defence and driven enlargement. No: burden-sharing rows and out-of-area failures weaken the case.
"Role and significance of these institutions, including their strengths and weaknesses"Evaluate the view that the IMF and World Bank do more harm than good in the developing world.Yes: conditions attached to loans force austerity on the poorest. No: they provide finance and stability no other body can offer.
"Significance of how global economic governance deals with the issue of poverty"Evaluate the view that global economic governance has failed the poorest states.Yes: the North-South divide persists and the rules favour the rich core. No: poverty has fallen sharply where states joined the open economy.
"the use of veto"Evaluate the view that the veto prevents the UN Security Council from resolving global issues.Yes: P5 self-interest has blocked action from Syria to Ukraine. No: the veto keeps the great powers inside the system and talking.
"The role and significance of the global civil society and non-state actors"Evaluate the view that NGOs and global civil society have real power in global politics.Yes: NGOs shape agendas, expose abuses and deliver aid where states cannot. No: they persuade rather than decide, and states keep the final word.
Sum Section summary - the must-knows
1Facts most worth memorising
  • The Security Council has 5 veto powers (US, Russia, China, UK, France) and 10 elected members.
  • The General Assembly is universal but non-binding; the Security Council is binding.
  • NATO is collective defence under Article 5; it expanded after the Cold War.
  • The IMF lends in crises with conditions; the World Bank funds long-term development.
  • SAPs and conditionality are the core criticism of the IMF and World Bank.
  • The WTO sets and enforces trade rules; its Appellate Body has been blocked since 2019.
  • The G7 is rich democracies; the G20 adds emerging economies and is more representative.
  • Dependency and world-systems theory argue the system keeps the poor periphery subordinate.
  • The North-South divide is the gap between the rich North and poorer South.
  • Belt and Road and the AIIB are China's rival, no-strings economic institutions.
2Examples most worth memorising
  • P5 veto paralysis (Russia on Ukraine, US on Israel)
  • Rwanda 1994 UN inaction
  • NATO and Kosovo 1999
  • Finland and Sweden joining NATO
  • IMF conditionality in Greece 2010-12
  • World Bank IDA clean water
  • WTO Appellate Body blocked since 2019
  • G20 coordinating the 2008 response
  • Belt and Road and the AIIB
  • Sanctions on Russia evaded by China and India
3Evaluation points most worth memorising
  • The veto both secures great-power buy-in and paralyses the UN.
  • NATO has force but no universal legitimacy; the UN the reverse.
  • The IMF and World Bank stabilise and develop, but on Western terms.
  • Economic governance has lost enforcement bite (the WTO).
  • Poverty has fallen but unevenly, so 'significantly' turns on East Asia.
  • Reform is blocked by those who benefit from the status quo.
  • Governance is fragmenting toward rival institutions.
  • NGOs show governance is not only states.
  • The G20 is more representative but lacks teeth.
  • Dependency theory frames the strongest counter on poverty.
4Examiner warnings to act on
  • Judge each body and organ separately, not 'global governance' as one thing.
  • Engage the operative term (significantly, effective, more than).
  • Do not confuse the IMF (crisis) with the World Bank (development), or the UN with NATO.
  • Always bring in non-state actors and rival institutions.
  • Reach a clear, sustained verdict.
5Strongest essay arguments
  • The UN supplies legitimacy but is hostage to the veto on hard security.
  • The IMF and World Bank help, but conditionality and Western control limit them.
  • Economic governance still convenes the powerful but has lost enforcement.
  • Poverty reduction is real but concentrated in East Asia.
  • Reform comes through rival bodies, not the existing ones.
Test Section test - 12 questions

Twelve mixed questions covering the whole section. Your most recent score is shown in the top bar.

Practise this topic on Panther
← Area 1Area 3 →