In the United States, the Supreme Court and the Federal Reserve System are only indirectly responsive to voters. Professional norms and standards help keep judges and bankers accountable. In addition to voting, constituencies communicate and agitate over issues through a variety of means, such as letters, polls, Internet postings and protests. Interest groups and a free press play an important role at the local, national and transnational levels. Rather than merely rejecting the arguments of the protesters, defenders of international institutions should experiment to improve accountability.
Transparency is essential.
International organizations should provide more access to their decision-making process, even if this requires delayed release of records in the manner of the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Reserve. In some cases, such as the Internet Corporation on Assigned Names and Numbers, experiments with direct voting may prove fruitful, although the danger of capture by interest groups remains a problem. Hybrid networks that combine governmental, intergovernmental, and nongovernmental representatives, such as the World Commission on Dams, are another avenue to explore. We need to think harder about norms and procedures for the governance of globalization. Denial of the problem, misleading domestic political analogies, and unexamined claims of democratic deficits will not do.