IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v17y2026i1p168-173.html

Can the United Nations Avoid the Fate of the League of Nations?: Why Bold Reform May be the Only Option

Author

Listed:
  • Kristinn Sv. Helgason

Abstract

The United Nations is facing an uncertain future. The United States, the largest financial contributor to the UN since its inception in 1945, has regularly called for greater efficiency in the work of the Organization. However, these demands have invariably faced strong opposition from the many developing and other states that contribute little financial resources to the Organization. Over time, this political impasse has helped to legitimize suboptimal efficiency as the opportunity cost of doing business in the UN system. Yet, recent changes in the domestic political landscape in many advanced economies have rendered this longstanding compromise no longer feasible. This paper argues that short‐term efforts to reduce costs are not likely to have a sustainable impact, as the large number of states that contribute little financial resources to the UN system will soon have renewed incentives to call for increased budgets rather than to institutionalize cost‐effectiveness measures. Instead, states would be well‐advised to focus on rule changes in areas such as governance and coordination structures and the selection of senior leaders and staff, as well as to articulate a new mission for the Organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristinn Sv. Helgason, 2026. "Can the United Nations Avoid the Fate of the League of Nations?: Why Bold Reform May be the Only Option," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 17(1), pages 168-173, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:17:y:2026:i:1:p:168-173
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.70114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.70114
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.70114?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:17:y:2026:i:1:p:168-173. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.