What is the primary focus of the CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference?

The conference, held in York, GBR, focuses on examining the crisis of the rules-based international order.

What academic level is this conference designed for?

This conference is designed for individuals at the college level.

Where is the CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference taking place?

The conference is being held in the city of York, GBR.

CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference 2026

Name: CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference 2026
Start: 2026-09-04T00:00:00Z
End: 2026-09-04T00:00:00Z
Location: York

Sep 4–4, 2026York, United KingdomIn-person

Starts in 27 daysRegistration open

The CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference is an academic gathering hosted in York, GBR, focusing on the crisis of the rules-based international order. This event provides a platform for scholars and practitioners to present research, engage in discussions, and foster collaborations on contemporary challenges and developments. It is designed for those at the college level.

Committees & topics

Topics
The Future of the Rules-Based International Order · Institutional Breakdown, Resilience, and Reform · Global Governance, Geopolitics, and Business Strategy · Climate Change, Sustainability, and Institutional Responses · Regulation, Law, and Corporate Accountability · Inequality, Social Justice, and Political Economy · Business Ethics and Legitimacy in Times of Crisis · The Role of Higher Education in Uncertain Times

Why it matters

The conference addresses a critical juncture in global affairs: the crisis of the rules-based international order. This topic is profoundly relevant as it underpins international stability, economic cooperation, and the resolution of transnational challenges. Understanding the dynamics of this crisis is essential for policymakers, academics, and practitioners seeking to navigate an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape.

The discussions at this conference can illuminate various facets of this crisis, from economic protectionism and geopolitical competition to the erosion of multilateral institutions. The insights generated are crucial for developing effective engagement strategies and fostering international cooperation in an era of shifting power balances. The academic focus ensures a rigorous examination of the underlying causes and potential solutions.

Furthermore, the conference's setting in York, GBR, provides a unique European perspective on these global challenges. The GBR's role in international relations, particularly in the wake of recent geopolitical shifts, adds a specific dimension to the discourse on the rules-based order. Participants will benefit from diverse viewpoints and interdisciplinary approaches to these pressing issues.

How to prepare

To effectively engage with the themes of the CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference, participants should undertake a thorough dynamic analysis of the current international order. This includes examining the historical evolution of the rules-based system, identifying key actors and institutions, and understanding the various pressures contributing to its perceived crisis. A strong grasp of international political economy and international law will be particularly beneficial.

Consider preparing case studies or research proposals that directly address specific aspects of the rules-based international order. For instance, analyzing the impact of rising powers like CHN or the evolving foreign policy of countries such as USA and RUS on global norms and institutions could provide valuable contributions. Understanding the perspectives of different states and non-state actors is crucial for a nuanced discussion.

Participants should also be prepared to engage in discussions about potential pathways forward. This might involve exploring reforms to existing international bodies, proposing new frameworks for cooperation, or analyzing the role of regional blocs. Familiarity with concepts like accountability">accountability in international governance and the challenges of multilateralism will enhance participation. The conference offers a college-level forum for these critical discussions.

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 4 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United Kingdom

A key proponent of the rules-based international order, GBR faces internal and external pressures that shape its approach to global governance.

Role in topic

As a host nation in Europe, GBR has historically played a significant role in shaping international norms and institutions. Its current foreign policy navigates between traditional alliances and new geopolitical realities, making its perspective on the crisis of the rules-based order particularly insightful.

United States

Historically a primary architect and enforcer of the rules-based order, USA's commitment and approach to multilateralism are subject to ongoing debate and shifts.

Role in topic

USA's actions and policies have profound implications for the stability and future of the rules-based international order. Its engagement, or disengagement, with international institutions and agreements directly influences global governance and the perceived legitimacy of the system.

China

A rising global power, CHN's increasing influence challenges existing structures and norms, advocating for a more multipolar world order.

Role in topic

CHN's economic and political ascent has led to a re-evaluation of the rules-based order. Its initiatives, such as the Belt and Road, and its stance on international law, present both opportunities and challenges to the established global framework.

Russia

Often viewed as a revisionist power, RUS frequently challenges elements of the existing rules-based order, particularly concerning sovereignty and security.

Role in topic

RUS's foreign policy actions and its critiques of Western-led institutions are central to discussions about the crisis of the rules-based international order. Its role in regional conflicts and its approach to international agreements significantly impact global stability.

Topics & background

The background behind each topic and the actors that shape it.

The Future of the Rules-Based International Order

The rules-based international order emerged from the wreckage of the Second World War, anchored by the UN Charter (1945), the Bretton Woods institutions, the GATT/WTO trading system, and a dense web of treaties on human rights, arms control, and the law of the sea. For decades, it rested on a tacit bargain: the United States and its allies underwrote security and open markets, while rising powers accepted constraints in exchange for predictability and access. That bargain has frayed. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 shattered the post-1945 norm against territorial conquest in Europe; China's challenges to UNCLOS rulings in the South China Sea, repeated US tariff escalations, and paralysis of the WTO Appellate Body have eroded confidence that core rules will be enforced impartially. The contemporary debate is no longer whether the order is under strain but what replaces or reforms it. Western capitals frame the contest as one between rules-based liberalism and revisionist authoritarianism, while Beijing, Moscow, and many Global South states argue the existing order reflects a narrow set of post-colonial Western interests and call for a more 'multipolar' or 'democratized' system. BRICS+ expansion in 2024-2025, the rise of plurilateral and minilateral arrangements (AUKUS, IPEF, the Quad), and the weaponization of the dollar and export controls have created a more transactional, bloc-based landscape. The central question for institutions is whether the order can be reformed from within or whether it is fragmenting into competing regulatory and security spheres.

Key players

Institutional Breakdown, Resilience, and Reform

Across domains, the institutions designed to manage interdependence are visibly under stress. The UN Security Council has been deadlocked over Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and Syria by competing P5 vetoes; the WTO Appellate Body has been non-functional since 2019 after sustained US blocking of appointments; the WHO's pandemic treaty negotiations stalled into 2024-2025; and regional bodies such as ECOWAS have lost members after coups in the Sahel. Domestically, surveys by Edelman, Pew, and the OECD show declining trust in legislatures, courts, media, and central banks across both democracies and autocracies, while populist movements have made institutional 'capture' or dismantling a central political program. Yet the picture is not uniformly bleak. The EU has demonstrated unexpected resilience through joint debt issuance (NextGenerationEU), coordinated sanctions, and energy diversification after 2022. The IMF and World Bank have undertaken governance reviews and capital increases, and the UN's 2024 Pact for the Future committed to Security Council and international financial architecture reform. The committee's challenge is to distinguish genuine reform pathways — quota realignment at the IMF, SC enlargement, dispute-settlement reconstruction — from cosmetic adjustments, and to ask which institutional designs actually produce resilience under polarization, fiscal strain, and rapid technological change.

Key players

Global Governance, Geopolitics, and Business Strategy

For three decades after the Cold War, multinational firms operated on an assumption of progressive market integration: extended supply chains, just-in-time logistics, and largely apolitical capital flows. That model has been overturned by a cascade of shocks — the US-China trade war from 2018, the COVID-19 supply disruptions, Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing energy and sanctions regime, and the rapid expansion of export controls on semiconductors, AI, and critical minerals. Industrial policy has returned in force, with the US CHIPS and Inflation Reduction Acts, the EU Green Deal Industrial Plan and Critical Raw Materials Act, and China's 'dual circulation' and Made in China 2025 strategies all redirecting investment along geopolitical lines. For firms, this means geopolitics is no longer a peripheral risk function but a core determinant of strategy: where to locate fabs and battery plants, how to navigate secondary sanctions, how to comply with overlapping ESG and disclosure regimes, and how to manage 'de-risking' from China without forfeiting access to its market. Governments, in turn, increasingly treat private firms as instruments of statecraft — from semiconductor export licenses to social media regulation. The committee will examine how governance frameworks (OECD guidelines, UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, WTO subsidies rules) can keep pace, and whether 'friend-shoring' produces genuine resilience or merely a more expensive and fragmented global economy.

Key players

Climate Change, Sustainability, and Institutional Responses

The scientific consensus, most recently in the IPCC AR6 Synthesis Report (2023), is that the world is on track to overshoot the 1.5°C Paris target within the next decade, with current NDCs implying warming closer to 2.5-2.9°C by 2100. COP28 in Dubai produced the first explicit call to 'transition away from fossil fuels' and operationalized the Loss and Damage Fund, while COP29 in Baku set a new collective quantified goal on climate finance of USD 300 billion per year by 2035 — a figure widely criticized by developing countries as inadequate relative to assessed needs of over USD 1 trillion. Implementation, not ambition, is now the binding constraint. Institutionally, responses are fragmenting across multiple layers: UNFCCC processes, the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (entering full force in 2026), ISSB sustainability disclosure standards, sovereign green bond markets, and a proliferation of national net-zero laws. Tensions are sharpening over carbon border taxes as disguised protectionism, over the role of carbon markets and removals, and over who pays for adaptation in climate-vulnerable states. The committee will weigh how international institutions, regulators, and firms can credibly align with science-based pathways while managing distributional conflict between historic emitters, emerging economies, and frontline states.

Key players

Regulation, Law, and Corporate Accountability

The last decade has seen a sharp expansion in the legal architecture of corporate accountability. The EU has led with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) adopted in 2024, the AI Act, the Digital Markets and Digital Services Acts, and the General Data Protection Regulation. The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011) have moved from soft norms toward hard law in jurisdictions such as France (Loi de Vigilance), Germany (Lieferkettengesetz), and Norway. In the US, the SEC's climate disclosure rule, FTC antitrust revival, and state-level ESG backlash have created a fragmented and litigated landscape. At the same time, courts are increasingly venues for accountability: climate litigation has exploded (Milieudefensie v. Shell, the KlimaSeniorinnen ruling at the ECtHR in 2024, ICJ and ITLOS advisory opinions on state climate obligations), and ICC arrest warrants have implicated heads of state and corporate enablers of conflict. The central tension for the committee is between rising substantive standards — on human rights due diligence, AI safety, tax transparency, anti-corruption — and uneven enforcement capacity, jurisdictional arbitrage, and political backlash framing such rules as overreach. Delegates should consider how legitimacy, comparability, and enforceability of corporate accountability regimes can be strengthened without freezing international cooperation.

Key players

Business Ethics and Legitimacy in Times of Crisis

Corporate legitimacy has been tested by a succession of crises: the 2008 financial crisis and the bailouts that followed, the Volkswagen 'Dieselgate' scandal, the opioid epidemic and Purdue Pharma settlements, the collapse of FTX and recurring crypto failures, the role of social media platforms in election integrity and the 2021 January 6 events, and the post-2022 question of whether to exit, stay, or quietly operate in Russia. Each episode has eroded the assumption that compliance equals ethics, and pushed scrutiny toward the legitimacy of corporate purpose, lobbying, and political speech. The rise of ESG and stakeholder capitalism — exemplified by the 2019 Business Roundtable statement — has now collided with backlash: 'greenhushing' and 'rainbow-washing' accusations, US state laws restricting ESG investing, and shareholder activism on both sides. At the same time, wars in Ukraine and Gaza have forced companies into explicit ethical choices on operations, advertising, and employee dissent. The committee will explore frameworks — the UN Global Compact, OECD Guidelines for MNEs, ISO 37000 governance standard, and emerging AI ethics norms — and ask what genuine legitimacy requires when crises demand action faster than rules can be written, and when there is no neutral ground.

Key players

The Role of Higher Education in Uncertain Times

Universities sit at the intersection of nearly every contemporary fault line: geopolitical competition over research and talent (notably US-China decoupling in STEM, the UK and EU's research-security frameworks, and visa restrictions); fiscal pressure from declining demographics in many advanced economies and squeezed public funding; the generative-AI shock to teaching, assessment, and academic publishing since 2022; and intense political contestation over campus speech, protests around Gaza, DEI policies, and the role of foreign donations. Major systems — from the US Ivy League to the UK Russell Group to continental flagships — face simultaneous legitimacy and solvency crises. At the same time, higher education remains central to almost every policy agenda on this committee's docket: climate transition, AI governance, inequality, institutional reform, and corporate accountability all depend on research capacity and credentialed expertise. Emerging models — micro-credentials, transnational campuses, public-interest research consortia, and AI-augmented pedagogy — challenge the traditional university, while authoritarian pressures on academic freedom (in Hungary, Russia, China, and elsewhere) and the rising cost of attendance in the Anglosphere raise questions about access and independence. The committee will assess what role universities can and should play as institutions of knowledge, mobility, and democratic deliberation under sustained uncertainty.

Key players

Resources

News, lessons, and country profiles to prep for CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference 2026.

Recent reporting to ground your prep

West Bengal Voter Deletion Crisis 2026

West Bengal Voter Deletion Crisis

Delimitation Based on 2011 Census

Supreme Court Upholds Election Commission Dis

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Dynamic Analysis

Engagement Strategies

The Power-Interest Grid

Hidden Stakeholders

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Stakeholder Mapping

Advanced Negotiation

Multilateral Negotiation

Policy Brief Writing

United Kingdom September 2026

By committee

Frequently asked questions

CEGBI/SBS Summer Conference 2026

Sep 4–4, 2026York, United KingdomIn-person

Starts in 27 daysRegistration open

Committees & topics

Topics
The Future of the Rules-Based International Order · Institutional Breakdown, Resilience, and Reform · Global Governance, Geopolitics, and Business Strategy · Climate Change, Sustainability, and Institutional Responses · Regulation, Law, and Corporate Accountability · Inequality, Social Justice, and Political Economy · Business Ethics and Legitimacy in Times of Crisis · The Role of Higher Education in Uncertain Times

Why it matters

How to prepare

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 4 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United Kingdom

A key proponent of the rules-based international order, GBR faces internal and external pressures that shape its approach to global governance.

Role in topic

United States

Historically a primary architect and enforcer of the rules-based order, USA's commitment and approach to multilateralism are subject to ongoing debate and shifts.

Role in topic

China

A rising global power, CHN's increasing influence challenges existing structures and norms, advocating for a more multipolar world order.

Role in topic

Russia

Often viewed as a revisionist power, RUS frequently challenges elements of the existing rules-based order, particularly concerning sovereignty and security.

Role in topic