From solutions to action
Problems are global. Decisions still are not.
Climate, nuclear risk, artificial intelligence, biodiversity and other major challenges cross national borders. But the decisions needed to address them still depend mainly on States with different interests, priorities and timelines.
How can we protect common interests when no one can do it alone?
The problem
Chapter 1 · The problem
An interdependent world, fragmented decisions
States remain indispensable for governing their own societies. But some problems have a scale that no State can control on its own.
A shared atmosphere, the oceans, nuclear risk, technologies capable of spreading worldwide and other global threats require cooperation among countries. This cooperation exists today, but it often depends on complex negotiations, diverging national interests, and agreements that can be difficult to apply or enforce.
How a decision gets fragmented
- Global problem
- National decisions
- Different interests
- Compromises · Delays · Commitments that are not always binding
- Insufficient response
This does not mean that international cooperation does not work. It means that, for some problems, the available tools may not be sufficient given the scale and urgency of the challenge.
Five obstacles
Why is it so hard to decide together?
Open a card to read the full reasoning.
- 01
National interests
Every government answers first to its own country
It is natural for a government to defend the interests of its own citizens. But when a problem is global, what benefits a single country in the short term may conflict with what is needed for everyone in the long term. Climate, oceans, nuclear security or global technologies show this limit: no one can solve the problem alone, but everyone may have an interest in waiting for others to act first.
- 02
Political timeframes
Politics moves on short timeframes, many problems on long ones
Governments and administrations must respond to immediate needs and, in democracies, to relatively short electoral cycles. Many global decisions, instead, require investments and choices whose greatest benefits may appear only after decades.
- Elections and today's urgenciesA few years
- Climate · biodiversity · global risksDecades and generations
This is not a criticizm of democracy: it is a structural difficulty that democracies must learn to compensate for by also taking the long term into account.
- 03
Economic interests
Economic interests do not always coincide with the collective interest
The necessary transformations can affect markets, profits, employment and the value of investments. Sectors at risk of losing advantages therefore have strong incentives to slow down or shape certain decisions. At the same time, millions of workers and entire communities may depend economically on those very sectors.
- 04
Competition among States
States compete as well as cooperate
The same countries that must collaborate on climate, artificial intelligence or nuclear weapons are simultaneously competing for security, technology, resources, influence and economic advantage. A decision that benefits everyone can therefore be perceived by some as a loss of strategic advantage.
- 05
Limits of agreements
International agreements have limits
International cooperation has produced important results and remains indispensable. But many agreements depend on States' willingness to join, honor their commitments and continue supporting them over time. In some institutions, moreover, decision-making rules, veto rights or a lack of sufficiently effective tools can make it difficult to act when countries' interests diverge.
The problem is not just finding solutions. It is creating the conditions that make it possible to decide and apply them together.
If no State can face a global problem alone, how can we protect the common interest?
A possible direction
Chapter 2 · A possible direction
A shared decision-making capacity for truly global problems
States would continue to govern all matters they can effectively address at the national or local level. But for a limited number of problems that no country can solve alone, a shared capacity to decide and act in the interest of humanity as a whole is needed.
Not a world government, then, but institutions with clearly defined competences, powers sufficient to address global problems, and equally clear limits to prevent their extension into other areas.
Decide at the level closest to citizens. Act at the global level only when the problem is truly global.
Principle of subsidiarity
Every decision should be taken at the lowest level capable of addressing it effectively.
Levels of decision-making
- Community / City
- Regions
- States
- Global cooperation
Truly global issues
- climate and atmosphere
- nuclear risk
- safety of technologies capable of producing global risks
- oceans and other global commons
- pandemics with global potential
This list does not extend to ordinary areas of national government.
Not an authority that decides everything. A shared capacity limited to the issues that no State can solve alone.
No-Extinction does not propose a world government: no authority that replaces States or decides on their behalf on matters they are able to address.
Who decides?
Legitimacy cannot come from a single source
If a decision affects all of humanity, it should not depend solely on governments, nor solely on experts, nor on a majority without limits and checks.
A future global decision-making capacity should combine different forms of legitimacy, so that no single actor can control it.
Scientific knowledge
Decisions must start from the best available knowledge and independent risk assessments.
Democratic representation
People affected by decisions must be able to be represented and have tools to influence the choice of who decides.
Representation of States
States remain fundamental components of the international community and must take part in decisions on global issues.
Independent oversight
Those who decide must be subject to rules, transparency, verification, the possibility of challenge, and term limits.
We do not yet know what the best system is. But we know that no system should allow science, governments, the majority or economic interests to decide alone.
The concrete model — direct election, representation of States, scientific bodies, citizens' assemblies or mixed systems — remains open to debate.
Safeguards
But how do we avoid a new concentration of power?
An authority created to protect us from global risks must not become a risk itself.
- 01
Limited mandate
The authority could act exclusively within the global matters defined by its mandate. It could not assign itself new competences. Any expansion should require an extraordinary procedure and broad legitimacy.
- 02
Expertise, integrity and legitimacy
Those who take on responsibility for matters affecting all of humanity must have adequate expertise and offer solid guarantees of integrity and independence. But expertise alone does not confer the right to decide for billions of people. Selection and oversight procedures must therefore be built that combine scientific knowledge, representativeness, independence, transparency and accountability.
- Expertise
- Integrity
- Legitimacy
- Independence
- Transparency
- Accountability
The concrete selection method — election, appointment, mixed systems — remains an open question.
- 03
Independence
Those who take on responsibility should be subject to strict rules on conflicts of interest, funding, relations with governments and businesses, economic interests and incompatibilities. No government, company, economic group or individual funder should be able to control the selection or decisions of those who exercise these responsibilities.
The greater the power, the greater the transparency must be.
- 04
Real powers + real oversight
If a new institution could only issue recommendations, it would reproduce the very limitation it is meant to overcome. Within the matters covered by its mandate, it must therefore be able to take genuinely binding decisions, subject to strict rules, oversight and safeguards.
But such decisions must be
- Limited to the mandate
- Reasoned
- Public
- Verifiable
- Contestable through defined procedures
- Subject to independent oversight
The consequences of violations must be defined in advance, proportionate, applied through public procedures, and contestable before an independent body.
- 05
Time-limited mandates
Term limits, rotation of responsibilities and clear rules must prevent power from remaining indefinitely concentrated in the same people. A healthy institution must continue to function regardless of who temporarily leads it.
- 06
Periodic review of the mandate
Not only should people have limited terms: the institution's competences and powers must also be periodically reviewed. A competence created to address one problem must not automatically become permanent or extend into other areas.
Explicit limits of power
What it should and should not be able to do
Only within the matters defined by the global mandate, it should be able to
- set common goals and rules
- independently verify compliance with commitments
- take binding decisions when action by individual States is not sufficient
- intervene quickly in the face of urgent global risks
- apply, in cases of proven violations, predetermined and proportionate consequences
It should not be able to
- govern the ordinary life of States and citizens
- exercise general powers over education, culture and administrative organization
- decide local and regional policies
- assign itself new competences
- replace States on matters they can address effectively
The logic stays the same
- Local when possible
- National when necessary
- Global only when indispensable
Powers sufficient to address global problems. Limits sufficient to prevent those powers from becoming a problem.
Model still open
No-Extinction does not propose a definitive institutional model. The requirements are defined; the concrete institutional architecture must emerge from debate, testing and improvement of proposals. We propose opening a debate on how to build a global decision-making capacity that is at the same time effective, competent, democratic and accountable.
Building the movement
Chapter 3 · Building the movement
A world movement to build what is still missing
No one changes the world alone. But every great change starts with a few.
The World Movement proposed by No-Extinction starts from a simple idea: citizens can help create the political will needed to jointly address problems that no country can solve alone.
It does not aim to replace governments, parties, international organizations or existing associations.
It aims to bring together people from different countries, cultures and opinions around a common goal: creating more effective, democratic and accountable tools to address the great global issues.
It is a democratic, peaceful, transparent and non-partisan movement: it does not replace governments or institutions, but builds from the bottom up the political will needed for global problems to be addressed effectively.
How a movement grows
- Me
- Us
- Network
- Institutions
- World
We do not ask everyone to think the same way
It is not necessary to agree on every solution. Debate between different ideas is essential when problems are complex. What can unite us is the recognition that some challenges affect everyone and that no one can address them effectively alone.
From differences to a shared responsibility
- Different countries · Different cultures · Different ideas
- Common problems
- Shared responsibility
Four ways to get started
Learn
Understand the problems, the connections and the possible solutions.
Get Involved
Contribute ideas, expertise, materials and initiatives.
Spread the word
Help make No-Extinction, LAST CHANCE and the available materials known to people, schools and associations.
Discuss
Debate among people with different experiences and ideas is part of the project.
Conceptual representation, not real thresholds
- One person
- Many people
- Community
- Different countries
- International network
- Ability to influence political priorities
Understand. Assess. Then decide.
Explore the proposals. Check the sources. Question what does not convince you. Suggest alternatives. If in the end you believe this path makes sense, help us build it.
From people to institutions
From people to institutions
A movement does not have to wait to become a majority before starting. Ideas can be born in small groups, spread through schools, associations, communities and international networks, enter public debate and eventually influence institutions.
No step is guaranteed. But almost all great social changes began before they became politically possible.
A possible path
- People
- Community
- Networks
- Public opinion
- Institutions
From participants to community
Build the community first, then the necessary structures
No-Extinction wants to grow through people who share knowledge, experience and proposals, regardless of the country they live in.
In the beginning, complex structures are not needed: what is needed are connections between people who want to contribute to the same goal.
If the Movement grows, organization, rules and structures can emerge when they become useful. But they must remain at the service of the community, not the other way around.
People first. Then, if necessary, structures to serve them.
Possible future evolution
Working groups, not hierarchies
When the number of participants makes it useful, thematic working groups open to different expertise and perspectives could emerge.
These are only hypothetical areas: none of these groups exists yet.
- Climate and environment
- Energy and mobility
- Economy and social transition
- Peace and nuclear risk
- AI and technology
- Global governance
- Communication and outreach
How it starts
A world movement starts small
Every great initiative starts with a few people. A World Movement cannot be created from above, nor declared as such simply by giving it a name. It can only become one if people from different countries recognize a common problem and progressively decide to collaborate.
Share an idea
No-Extinction provides analyses, solutions, a Handbook and educational tools.
Build a community
Interested people begin to take part, discuss, correct and spread the project.
Create an international network
Citizens, scholars, associations, schools and other organizations can collaborate while keeping their own autonomy.
Define concrete proposals
Debate must progressively turn into precise, realistic and verifiable requests.
Build consensus
The proposals are brought into public debate and improved through discussion and criticizm.
Bring the proposals to institutions
When there is sufficient support, citizens and organizations can ask governments and international institutions to discuss them and turn them into decisions.
Build democratic pressure
Peaceful and transparent pressure, based on participation, information and consensus: the more informed people there are, the harder it becomes to ignore their requests.
Achieve decisions
The ultimate goal is for shared demands to translate into concrete, binding and verifiable political decisions.
Growing without becoming what we are trying to change
- Transparency
- Pluralism
- Competence
- Independence
- Accountability
A movement's credibility also depends on its ability to accept criticizm, correct mistakes and make its decisions transparent.
- no leader should become indispensable
- ideas, rules and procedures must matter more than individual people
- independence requires financial transparency
- any funding must not allow governments, companies, large funders or individuals to buy influence
The goal is not to build a large organization quickly. It is to build, step by step, a network credible enough to grow.
Get involved
Chapter 4 · Get involved
What can I do?
There is no single way to get involved.
You can dedicate a few minutes or commit for longer. You can propose an idea, report an error, share material, spread the word about the project, use LAST CHANCE in a school, or discuss with others in the Forum.
Every useful contribution can help the project grow.
From the smallest gesture to the greatest involvement
- Share
- Report
- Propose
- Use
- Discuss
- Collaborate
Share
Spread the word about a piece of content, LAST CHANCE or the Handbook.
Report
Point out errors, sources, problems or possible improvements.
Propose
Submit an idea, content or material.
Use
Bring No-Extinction or LAST CHANCE into a school, association or group.
Discuss
Take part in discussions in the Forum.
Collaborate
Offer expertise and time to help develop the project.
You do not need to agree with No-Extinction to take part. Debate among different ideas is part of the project.
You do not need to reach the end of the path. Even the first step counts.
Shared principles
What can unite us
To collaborate, we do not need to agree on everything. We can have different ideas about the economy, politics, society or the best way to address a single issue. But a World Movement needs some shared principles that make it possible to work together.
Common future
Some problems transcend nations, cultures and generations. Protecting the conditions that make a decent life on Earth possible is a shared responsibility.
Knowledge
Knowledge before opinions
Decisions must start from the best available knowledge. Proposals must be verifiable, open to discussion and open to revision when new evidence emerges.
Dialogue
People must be able to discuss freely and criticize proposals without being treated as opponents.
We challenge ideas, not people.
Fairness
No one should be left behind. Solutions must consider not only their effectiveness, but also their consequences for people, workers, communities and countries with fewer resources.
Transparency
Power must have limits and checks. The greater an institution's power, the greater its transparency, accountability, oversight and the possibility to challenge its decisions must be.
The future
Future generations cannot take part in today's decisions, but they will bear their consequences. That is why their interests must factor into our choices.
- Knowledge
- Dialogue
- Responsibility
- Fairness
- Transparency
- Future
We are not looking for people who share all our ideas. We are looking for people willing to reason together about problems that affect everyone.
Getting started
Chapter 5 · Getting started
Is such a big change really possible?
Thinking about new forms of global cooperation can seem unrealistic.
But many institutions and forms of collaboration that we now consider normal were born because, at a certain point in history, the previous ones were no longer sufficient.
Change does not happen all at once. It begins when a growing number of people recognize a problem, imagine an alternative, and gradually build the consensus needed to achieve it.
The question is not whether it is easy. The question is whether we can afford not to try.
We do not know what form global cooperation will take in the coming decades. But we know that shared problems will increasingly require the ability to decide and act together.
We do not need to already know what the destination looks like in order to decide to start.
You do not have to agree with No-Extinction. You only have to be willing to seriously discuss how to address problems that affect everyone.
A direction
We do not have a definitive plan. We have a direction.
No-Extinction does not claim to have already defined the perfect structure for governing global issues. It proposes a direction: build more effective decision-making tools for truly global problems, while maintaining limited competences, democratic oversight, scientific knowledge, transparency and safeguards against abuses of power. The concrete model must emerge from debate.
How a proposal is built
- Proposals
- Debate
- Verification
- Improvement
The No-Extinction Forum is the space dedicated to proposals, sources, discussion, revision and updated versions.
- Proposal
- Sources
- Discussion
- Revision
- Updated version
The future is not yet decided
- Understand
- Decide
- Act
None of us can change the course of the world alone. But we can inform ourselves, discuss, combine expertise and build together a capacity for action that is still missing today. Every great change begins when someone decides it is worth trying.