Rethinking Global Governance: Integrating Technology Corporations into the UN System
Changrok Soh and Damian Bank advocate for adapting the United Nations to the digital era by engaging transnational technology corporations as accountable partners, thereby safeguarding the relevance and coherence of global governance in the 21st century.
The United Nations, conceived in the aftermath of global conflict, has long stood as the symbol of an international order governed by states and sustained by multilateral cooperation. Yet today, the world faces a profound structural transformation. The rise of transnational technology corporations has reshaped not only the global economy, but also the political, social, and normative foundations of our world. These entities command resources, influence, and capabilities rivaling or exceeding those of most nation-states. The pressing question is no longer whether these corporations should be regulated, but how the United Nations can redefine its own structure to meaningfully engage with these new centers of power.
This is not a call for surrendering the state-centric order. Rather, it is a call for bold, pragmatic adaptation – akin to the concessions made at the founding of the UN itself, when the ideal of sovereign equality yielded to the realities of post-war power politics through the creation of the Security Council’s permanent members with veto power. That controversial yet effective compromise enabled the survival and influence of the UN for nearly eight decades. Today, in the face of a unique digital paradigm shift, a similarly audacious realignment is necessary.
Beyond Regulation: Toward Structured Corporate Integration
Transnational technology corporations – Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, Tencent, and others – shape global discourse, control vast data ecosystems, and increasingly set de facto standards in areas such as artificial intelligence, privacy, and cybersecurity. They do so largely beyond the reach of traditional international institutions.
Previous UN efforts, including the Global Compact and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, have sought to influence corporate behavior through voluntary mechanisms. Yet the voluntary nature of these frameworks has limited their impact, especially in light of the enormous asymmetry between the normative expectations placed on states and those on corporations. Since businesses, whether technological or otherwise, are not formally integrated into the UN system, they largely evade direct international scrutiny. Instead, they operate under the protective umbrella of their home states, with their responsibilities shaped by national interests, global market logics, and consumer perceptions.
It is time to move beyond the model of corporate compliance toward a model of corporate participation – one that recognizes these entities as essential actors in global governance, assigns them responsibilities, but also grants them a formalized, though limited, role within the UN system.
A New Social Contract: Technology Corporations as Global Stakeholders
We propose the creation of a UN Digital Governance Council, a permanent multi-stakeholder body that includes not only states and civil society, but also formal representation of major technology corporations. These corporations would not hold sovereign status, nor would they possess voting rights equivalent to states. However, they would be granted structured consultative roles, responsibilities for global digital public goods, and obligations to uphold international norms:
- Consultative Rights: Corporations would participate in discussions on global digital policy, AI ethics, data governance, and cybersecurity under the auspices of the Council. Their input would be formalized, ensuring transparency and accountability, but decision-making authority would remain with states.
- Binding Obligations: In exchange for this role, technology corporations would accept binding commitments under international law, including compliance with a proposed UN Convention on Digital Responsibility. This treaty would establish legal standards for algorithmic transparency, data protection, and the prevention of technology-enabled human rights abuses.
- Accountability Mechanisms: A Corporate Periodic Review (CPR) process, akin to the Universal Periodic Review for states, would assess compliance. Non-compliance would trigger reputational sanctions, public reporting, and potential restrictions on participation in UN-led initiatives.
Learning from the Past: Realism Over Idealism
Critics might argue that this model risks "corporate capture" of multilateral institutions by elevating corporate strategic interests over ethical and even legal considerations. Others may highlight the issue of “corporate bluewashing,” whereby corporations publicly commit to international norms and human rights standards while taking minimal substantive action to implement or uphold these commitments in practice. Yet ignoring the power of these corporations risks a far greater peril: the irrelevance of the UN in shaping the digital future. The League of Nations failed not only because of structural flaws but also due to its idealistic detachment from geopolitical realities. The UN succeeded because it acknowledged power asymmetries and embedded them within a rules-based system.
In our era, the asymmetry is not only between powerful and weak states, but between states and transnational corporations. Just as the Security Council institutionalized state power through veto rights, a limited but structured inclusion of technology corporations can institutionalize corporate influence within a framework of accountability.
This is not about legitimizing corporate dominance but about containing and directing it through institutional engagement. The alternative – unregulated, unilateral norm-setting by private entities – is a retreat from the principles of international governance the UN was created to uphold.
A Digital Social Contract for the 21st Century
The proposal for structured corporate participation reflects the emerging global social contract. In the same way that states ceded some sovereignty to build the UN, technology corporations must accept global responsibilities commensurate with their power.
This new contract would include:
- Financial Contributions: Establishing a UN Digital Public Goods Fund, financed in part by technology corporations, to support digital infrastructure, inclusion, and literacy worldwide.
- Ethical Stewardship: Adherence to UN-sanctioned ethical guidelines for AI and emerging technologies, with third-party verification.
- Global Norm-setting: Participation in shaping international standards under state-led processes, including binding instruments.
Eventually developing a formalized mechanism for engaging technology corporations, not as donors or observers alone, but as accountable partners with defined responsibilities, limited consultative rights, and binding obligations to uphold international norms and laws.
Conclusion: A Necessary Evolution
We are at a historical inflection point. The structures of global governance must evolve to reflect the realities of digital power. By integrating transnational technology corporations into the UN system – not as sovereign equals, but as accountable partners – we can forge a new path that preserves the UN’s relevance and authority. These corporations, for all their faults, represent indispensable stakeholders in the emerging global order shaped by paradigm-changing digital technologies such as AI. The urgent question is not whether to engage them, but how to do so responsibly, transparently, and in service of the UN Charter’s enduring principles.
The choice is not between corporate inclusion or exclusion, but between orderly engagement and continued fragmentation. As in 1945, bold compromises today can secure a more just and sustainable global order for the digital age. The UN’s future – and that of global governance – depends on its ability to adapt to the world as it is, not as it once was.
Changrok Soh is Chair and Member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, Professor of International Relations and Human Rights, and Director of the International Human Rights Center at Korea University’s Graduate School of International Studies.
Damian Bank is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Global Research Institute, Graduate School of International Studies at Korea University exploring the implications of digital technologies on society and international relations.
Photo by Google DeepMind
