Money alone won’t save the multilateral system. We need a plan that tackles power imbalances, brings in the private sector and uses funds strategically to keep the system afloat, argues Erica Harper, head of research and policy studies at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights.
The unwinding of multilateralism is no longer abstract. It’s unfolding through job cuts, merger proposals and quiet plans to decamp to cheaper hubs. Host cities are absorbing the shock. International Geneva employs roughly 36,460 people – about one in ten jobs in the canton – with each post sustaining half another job across hospitality, education and essential services. The economic footprint is large; the civic one – what Geneva stands for – is larger still.
Unsurprisingly, talk of a “Geneva reset” has reached the highest echelons. The reflex to open the chequebook is understandable – but wrongheaded. It is crucial to recognise that this is not a liquidity crisis, but a normative one. Budget cuts are a blunt instrument wielded by states that no longer see the system as fair or suited to the current distribution of power and priorities.
What’s needed is a vision for a future-proofed, robust multilateral system and a crisp account of Geneva’s unique value within it. In a nutshell, if Geneva is to matter in the next era, it must start from purpose, not payroll. Three anchors should guide that effort.
Geneva as a centre for brokering solutions
Geneva’s sharpest advantage in renewing multilateralism is its neutrality and convening power. Let’s be clear, it isn’t for Geneva to draft a grand reform blueprint, but it can enable the hard conversations that real change requires.
One key question is: what will facilitate cooperation going forward? For many states, the language of international law and universal rights now reads less as shared grammar than as an accusation – or a proxy for power. They are demanding new frameworks for dialogue and decision-making, better suited to a plural order.
These debates are sensitive and high-stakes. Critics will say any loosening of rights and obligations is both wrong and self-defeating. Geneva is one of the few places – perhaps the only place – where such tensions can be aired without fanfare; other hubs lack the political climate, carry colonial baggage or are too culturally specific.
Geneva should actively embrace this role, leveraging its neutrality and its experience as a safe space where actors with divergent views can confront these elephants in the room together. Rebuilding legitimacy now requires this honesty.
Invite the private sector into the engine room
A reset worthy of Geneva will be judged by outcomes, not rhetoric. That means moving companies from the margins to the drafting table as co-architects. Geneva has all of the ingredients to make this change at scale. Switzerland consistently tops global rankings for innovation and digital competitiveness. Pair that ecosystem with dense multilateral networks, regulators within walking distance, and proximity to finance and venture talent, and you have the foundations of a delivery culture.
Instead of declarations, convenings should culminate in “build rooms”: time-bound collaborations where agencies, think tanks, start-ups and large firms co-produce solutions with pre-cleared procurement pathways. There should be no pilots without a scale-up plan – budgeted, assigned and scheduled. If a tool works, standardise it; if it doesn’t, retire it quickly and publicly. This is the work that moves systems. It is also an area where Geneva is uniquely placed to lead.
Leverage finance to steer reform, not delay it
A final step is controlling the scope of the reset. Blanket bailouts risk fossilising current inefficiencies. Yet allowing the edifice to collapse would be worse – both for Geneva and the people who rely on the system in their hardest moments. What’s needed is targeted, strategic support that keeps essential capabilities alive while reforms take hold.
This is not a call to do less, but for doing enough of the right things to prevent the system from sliding into thin irrelevance until a bigger shock forces reinvention under worse terms. The best approach is a managed reset: preserve what works, evolve what divides, test what comes next. If Geneva chooses this path of mission over payroll, it will not just protect its economic base – it will regain its relevance, once again becoming the place where a leaner, more legitimate multilateral system is built.
Erica Harper is head of research and policy studies at the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. A practitioner-academic specialising in international criminal law and post-conflict governance, her current research examines the intersectionality between economic development, security and the rule of law.
Geneva Solutions publishes opinions and columns proposed by or requested from external contributors and experts. These texts reflect the point of view of their authors and do not represent the position of the media.