Introduction
Since the end of the Second World War in 1945, international institutions have played a pivotal role in shaping global governance, economic development, and social progress across various sectors. These organisations, ranging from supranational bodies such as the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) to subnational collaborations facilitated by national and local governments, have addressed critical issues like trade, health, and security. This essay examines the sectoral impacts of international institutions according to their respective roles, focusing on their contributions to economic and social sectors. It illustrates these impacts through examples from two countries, namely the United Kingdom (UK) and Kenya, to demonstrate the interplay between supranational and subnational efforts. Specifically, the analysis explores how these institutions have influenced trade and development in the economic sector and health initiatives in the social sector. By considering a range of perspectives, this essay aims to highlight both the achievements and limitations of international institutions in shaping sectoral outcomes over the past seven decades.
The Role of International Institutions: Supranational and Subnational Dimensions
International institutions operate at multiple levels, from supranational organisations that transcend national boundaries to subnational entities that implement policies at local or regional levels. Supranational institutions, such as the UN and the EU, often set overarching frameworks and policies that member states adopt, while subnational bodies—local governments or regional authorities—translate these policies into actionable initiatives tailored to specific contexts. This dual structure allows for a broad impact across sectors, though it also presents challenges in terms of coherence and effectiveness.
At the supranational level, institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) provide guidelines and resources to address global challenges. For instance, the WTO has facilitated trade liberalisation since its inception in 1995, influencing national economies by reducing tariffs and promoting free markets (Hoekman and Kostecki, 2009). Conversely, at the subnational level, regional and local governments adapt these global policies to fit domestic needs, often collaborating with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and community groups. This layered approach ensures that international efforts are grounded in local realities, though discrepancies in implementation can sometimes undermine overall goals. The following sections delve into specific sectoral impacts, drawing on examples from the UK and Kenya to illustrate these dynamics.
Economic Sector: Trade and Development Impacts
In the economic sector, international institutions have significantly shaped trade and development outcomes through policies and aid mechanisms. The establishment of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank in 1944 under the Bretton Woods Agreement marked a turning point in global economic governance. These institutions aimed to stabilise international currencies and provide financial assistance for development projects, particularly in post-war reconstruction and later in developing economies (Woods, 2006).
In the UK, the influence of supranational institutions is evident in its historical participation in the EU. Until its withdrawal in 2020 (Brexit), the UK benefited from access to the EU’s single market, which boosted trade by eliminating internal tariffs and harmonising regulations. According to data from the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS), approximately 50% of UK exports went to EU countries in the pre-Brexit era, highlighting the economic significance of this supranational framework (ONS, 2019). At the subnational level, regional development funds from the EU supported economically disadvantaged areas, such as parts of northern England, through initiatives like infrastructure projects and business grants. However, critics argue that such benefits were unevenly distributed, with some regions feeling marginalised—a sentiment that contributed to the Brexit vote (Goodwin and Heath, 2016).
In contrast, Kenya’s economic engagement with international institutions has often centred on development aid and structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) from the IMF and World Bank. Since the 1980s, these programmes aimed to promote economic stability by encouraging market liberalisation and reducing public spending. While SAPs led to some growth in export sectors, such as agriculture, they also resulted in reduced public services, exacerbating poverty in rural areas (Oxfam, 2002). At the subnational level, local Kenyan authorities have worked with international NGOs to implement microfinance projects, often in collaboration with UN agencies like the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). These initiatives have provided small-scale entrepreneurs with access to capital, though their reach remains limited by systemic issues such as corruption and inadequate infrastructure.
Social Sector: Health Initiatives and Outcomes
Turning to the social sector, international institutions have had a profound impact on health through coordinated efforts to combat disease and improve public health systems. The WHO, established in 1948, has been instrumental in setting global health standards and leading campaigns against major diseases such as smallpox and polio (Lee, 2009). Its role as a supranational body facilitates the sharing of expertise and resources, which member states can adapt to local conditions.
In the UK, the influence of the WHO is visible in national health strategies, particularly through the National Health Service (NHS). For example, the WHO’s frameworks on pandemic preparedness informed the UK’s response to global health crises, including the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak and, more recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. At the subnational level, local health authorities in the UK have implemented WHO guidelines by establishing vaccination programmes and public health campaigns tailored to regional needs. However, disparities in resource allocation often limit the effectiveness of such efforts, particularly in underserved communities (Marmot et al., 2020).
Kenya offers a contrasting perspective on health impacts, where international institutions have addressed endemic challenges such as HIV/AIDS and malaria. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, supported by the UN and WHO, has provided substantial funding for treatment and prevention programmes in Kenya since the early 2000s. According to WHO reports, these initiatives have contributed to a significant decline in HIV prevalence rates, from 10.5% in 1996 to approximately 4.5% in 2019 (WHO, 2020). At the subnational level, community health workers in Kenyan counties, often supported by international aid, have played a crucial role in distributing antiretroviral drugs and educating rural populations about disease prevention. Nevertheless, challenges such as limited healthcare infrastructure and funding shortfalls continue to hinder progress, revealing the limitations of international efforts when local systems are under-resourced.
Critical Evaluation: Achievements and Limitations
While international institutions have achieved notable successes in the economic and social sectors, their impacts are not without limitations. In the economic domain, supranational bodies like the EU and IMF have fostered trade and development, yet their policies can exacerbate inequalities, as seen in the UK’s regional disparities and Kenya’s experience with SAPs. Similarly, in the health sector, WHO-led initiatives have saved countless lives, but their effectiveness often depends on national and subnational capacity to implement recommendations—a capacity that varies widely between countries like the UK and Kenya.
Moreover, the roles of these institutions are sometimes constrained by geopolitical interests and bureaucratic inefficiencies. For instance, decision-making in the IMF and World Bank has historically been dominated by wealthier nations, leading to criticism that their policies disproportionately burden developing countries (Stiglitz, 2002). At the subnational level, the success of international initiatives often hinges on local governance, which may be undermined by corruption or lack of accountability, as observed in parts of Kenya. Therefore, while international institutions have driven progress, their impacts are arguably contingent on addressing structural inequalities and improving coordination across levels of governance.
Conclusion
In conclusion, from 1945 to the present day, international institutions have profoundly influenced sectoral outcomes in economic and social domains through their distinct yet interconnected roles at supranational and subnational levels. In the economic sector, organisations like the EU and IMF have shaped trade and development in countries like the UK and Kenya, with varying degrees of success and equity. Similarly, in the social sector, health initiatives led by the WHO have improved outcomes, though disparities in implementation persist. By examining these impacts through specific national and local contexts, this essay has highlighted both the achievements and shortcomings of international efforts. Ultimately, the effectiveness of these institutions depends on their ability to adapt to diverse local needs and address systemic challenges. Looking forward, fostering greater collaboration between supranational and subnational actors remains essential to ensuring equitable and sustainable progress across sectors.
References
- Goodwin, M. and Heath, O. (2016) The 2016 Referendum, Brexit and the Left Behind: An Individual-Level Analysis. The Political Quarterly, 87(3), pp. 323-332.
- Hoekman, B. M. and Kostecki, M. M. (2009) The Political Economy of the World Trading System: The WTO and Beyond. Oxford University Press.
- Lee, K. (2009) Global Institutions: The World Health Organization (WHO). Routledge.
- Marmot, M., Allen, J., Goldblatt, P., Herd, E. and Morrison, J. (2020) Build Back Fairer: The COVID-19 Marmot Review. Institute of Health Equity.
- Office for National Statistics (ONS). (2019) UK Trade: Goods and Services Publication Tables. ONS.
- Oxfam. (2002) Rigged Rules and Double Standards: Trade, Globalisation, and the Fight Against Poverty. Oxfam International.
- Stiglitz, J. E. (2002) Globalization and Its Discontents. W. W. Norton & Company.
- Woods, N. (2006) The Globalizers: The IMF, the World Bank, and Their Borrowers. Cornell University Press.
- World Health Organization (WHO). (2020) Global Health Observatory Data Repository: HIV/AIDS Prevalence in Kenya. WHO.
