Where will the Convegno 2026 take place?

The Convegno 2026 will be held in the city of Trento, ITA.

What is the central theme of the Convegno 2026?

The central theme of the Convegno 2026 is "Multilateralism Contested," focusing on the challenges and transformations affecting international cooperation.

Convegno 2026 – "Multilateralism Contested"

Name: Convegno 2026 – "Multilateralism Contested"
Start: 2026-09-03T00:00:00Z
End: 2026-09-05T00:00:00Z
Location: Trento

Sep 3–5, 2026Trento, ItalyIn-person

Starts in 26 daysRegistration open

The Convegno 2026, themed "Multilateralism Contested," will convene in Trento, ITA, to address the evolving landscape of international cooperation. This conference provides a platform for scholars and practitioners to dissect the challenges and transformations impacting multilateral institutions and global governance. Participants will explore the various pressures, both internal and external, that are reshaping the effectiveness and legitimacy of multilateral frameworks.

Committees & topics

Topics
Multilateralism Contested: The Strain on the Post-1945 Order · Political Regimes and Transitions: Democratic Backsliding and Authoritarian Resilience · Political Theory and Political History: Rethinking Legitimacy in an Age of Crisis · Comparative Politics and Institutions: Variations in Governance Performance · Political Communication: Media, Platforms, and the Public Sphere · Participation, Social Movements, and Interest Representation

Why it matters

Multilateralism, once a cornerstone of global stability and problem-solving, is currently facing unprecedented challenges. The rise of nationalist sentiments, geopolitical shifts, and the proliferation of complex global issues—from climate change to pandemics—are testing the resilience of established international norms and institutions. Understanding the nature of this contestation is crucial for identifying pathways to effective global cooperation in an increasingly fragmented world.

This event offers a vital opportunity to analyze the forces driving the contestation of multilateralism. It will delve into how different states and non-state actors perceive and interact with multilateral frameworks, and the implications of these interactions for peace, security, and sustainable development. By fostering rigorous academic debate, the conference aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the current international order and potential future trajectories.

How to prepare

To effectively engage with the themes of "Multilateralism Contested," participants should consider a comprehensive approach to their research and presentations. A strong foundation in the theoretical underpinnings of international relations, particularly theories related to international cooperation and conflict, will be beneficial. Examining historical precedents of multilateral challenges and successes can also provide valuable context.

When preparing, it is advisable to consider the diverse perspectives that contribute to the contestation of multilateralism. This includes understanding the motivations of states that advocate for alternative models of global governance, as well as the roles of non-state actors and regional blocs. Utilizing frameworks such as those found in "what-is-stakeholder-mapping" can assist in identifying key actors and their interests. Furthermore, exploring the concept of "hidden-stakeholders" can reveal less obvious but influential actors in the multilateral arena.

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 8 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United States

Historically a proponent of multilateral institutions, its current stance often reflects a tension between global leadership and national interests, sometimes leading to skepticism or selective engagement with multilateral bodies.

Role in topic

As a foundational architect of many post-World War II multilateral institutions, the USA's shifting commitment significantly impacts the stability and effectiveness of these organizations. Its actions, whether supportive or withdrawing, often set precedents for other nations.

China

Increasingly active in multilateral forums, often advocating for reforms that reflect a multipolar world order and its growing global influence, while also pursuing bilateral initiatives.

Role in topic

CHN's rising economic and political power challenges existing multilateral structures, particularly those dominated by Western powers. Its emphasis on South-South cooperation and alternative development models presents a distinct vision for global governance.

Russia

Often critical of what it perceives as Western-dominated multilateralism, advocating for a more balanced international system and asserting its national sovereignty.

Role in topic

RUS frequently challenges the legitimacy and efficacy of certain multilateral institutions, particularly those perceived to infringe upon its national interests. Its actions can contribute to fragmentation and gridlock within international bodies.

Germany

A strong advocate for robust multilateralism and international cooperation, often playing a leading role in European and global initiatives.

Role in topic

DEU consistently champions the strengthening of multilateral institutions and norms, viewing them as essential for addressing global challenges and promoting stability. Its diplomatic efforts often aim to bridge divides and foster consensus within international forums.

Brazil

Seeks to strengthen multilateral institutions, particularly those that can amplify the voice of developing nations and promote a more equitable global order.

Role in topic

BRA actively participates in various multilateral forums, advocating for reforms that reflect the interests of the Global South. Its engagement often highlights the need for greater inclusivity and representation in global decision-making processes.

India

Navigates between strategic autonomy and engagement with multilateral frameworks, often seeking to reform institutions to better reflect contemporary power dynamics.

Role in topic

IND's growing influence positions it as a significant voice in the debate over multilateralism. It often advocates for a more representative and equitable global order, while also prioritizing its national development and strategic interests.

Hungary

Exhibits a nationalistic approach, often challenging the authority of supranational bodies and prioritizing national sovereignty over certain multilateral commitments.

Role in topic

HUN's policies often reflect a skepticism towards certain aspects of multilateral integration, particularly within the European context. Its actions can highlight the tensions between national sovereignty and shared international governance.

Türkiye

Pursues a foreign policy that balances engagement with Western multilateral institutions with a growing emphasis on regional influence and strategic autonomy.

Role in topic

TUR's geopolitical position and evolving foreign policy contribute to the complexity of multilateral dynamics. Its engagement with various blocs and its assertion of national interests can both support and challenge existing multilateral frameworks.

Topics & background

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

Multilateralism Contested: The Strain on the Post-1945 Order

The multilateral system built after 1945 — anchored by the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions, and a web of treaty regimes — was designed to manage interstate disputes, stabilize the global economy, and codify shared norms. For decades it expanded in scope, absorbing decolonization, the end of the Cold War, and the rise of new economic powers. Yet since the 2008 financial crisis, and accelerating after 2016, the system has faced sustained challenges from great-power rivalry, populist backlash, paralysis in the UN Security Council over Ukraine and Gaza, and the perceived inability of the WTO and WHO to deliver during trade wars and the COVID-19 pandemic. The core dispute is whether the existing institutions can be reformed from within — through expanded Security Council membership, IMF quota reform, and new compacts such as the 2024 Global Digital Compact — or whether parallel orders are emerging. China's Belt and Road, the expansion of BRICS+, and U.S. tariff unilateralism each signal a fragmenting landscape. Middle powers and the Global South increasingly speak of 'à la carte multilateralism,' picking forums issue by issue rather than defending a single liberal order. Today the debate is less about whether multilateralism survives than about who writes its rules. The UN Pact for the Future (2024) and ongoing FfD4 negotiations test whether legitimacy can be rebuilt, while contested wars, climate financing gaps, and AI governance expose the limits of consensus diplomacy.

Key players

Political Regimes and Transitions: Democratic Backsliding and Authoritarian Resilience

The 'third wave' of democratization that swept Southern Europe, Latin America, and the post-Soviet space from the 1970s through the 1990s appeared, for a time, to confirm a global convergence toward liberal democracy. By the mid-2000s, however, V-Dem, Freedom House, and academic studies began documenting a reversal: incumbent leaders in Hungary, Turkey, Venezuela, India, and elsewhere hollowed out checks and balances while retaining electoral legitimacy. Scholars labeled the phenomenon 'democratic backsliding,' 'competitive authoritarianism,' or 'autocratization,' emphasizing that breakdowns now typically occur gradually and legally rather than through coups. The core dispute concerns both diagnosis and remedy. Some argue backsliding is driven by structural forces — inequality, cultural backlash, and information disorder — while others stress agency, pointing to specific illiberal playbooks copied across borders. Simultaneously, authoritarian regimes from China to the Gulf have demonstrated durability through performance legitimacy, digital surveillance, and selective co-optation, challenging modernization theory's assumption that wealth produces democracy. Recent years have added new variables: military coups across the Sahel, contested transitions in Myanmar and Sudan, the consolidation of personalist rule in Russia, and the durability of hybrid regimes. The question facing comparative scholars and policymakers is whether the current period is a temporary recession or a structural shift in the global distribution of regime types.

Key players

Political Theory and Political History: Rethinking Legitimacy in an Age of Crisis

Political theory and political history have long been in dialogue, from Thucydides and Machiavelli to the Cambridge School's recovery of republican thought and the Begriffsgeschichte tradition of Koselleck. The post-Cold War era saw a renewed confidence in liberal political theory — Rawlsian justice, deliberative democracy, cosmopolitan rights — paired with a 'history of political thought' that traced these ideals to specific European contexts. That settlement has since been destabilized by global, decolonial, and intellectual-historical critiques arguing that canonical concepts of sovereignty, representation, and citizenship were forged within empire and exclusion. The central dispute is methodological as well as substantive. How should theorists handle the historicity of concepts like 'the people,' 'the state,' or 'rights' when invoking them normatively today? Scholars such as Quentin Skinner, Samuel Moyn, and Adom Getachew have reframed the genealogy of human rights, self-determination, and constitutionalism, while political theorists confront populism, climate justice, and AI as problems the canon did not anticipate. The contemporary stakes are practical: debates over constitutional reform, transitional justice, memory politics, and the legitimacy of supranational institutions all depend on which historical narratives and theoretical traditions are mobilized. The committee's work bridges archival recovery and normative argument at a moment when both democratic and authoritarian actors claim historical legitimacy for incompatible projects.

Key players

Comparative Politics and Institutions: Variations in Governance Performance

Comparative politics emerged as a systematic discipline in the postwar period, seeking to explain why states with similar formal institutions produce divergent outcomes in stability, development, and rights protection. From Lipset and Rokkan's cleavage theory through Acemoglu and Robinson's institutionalism, the field has built a substantial body of evidence on how electoral systems, federal arrangements, party systems, and judicial structures shape political behavior and policy. Comparative institutionalism has also illuminated varieties of capitalism, welfare regimes, and modes of state-building. The core debate today concerns the relative weight of formal institutions versus informal practices, culture, and political economy. Institutions once seen as 'self-enforcing equilibria' have proven vulnerable to capture by executives, oligarchs, and transnational financial flows. The 'institutional turn' has been complicated by recognition that constitutions and electoral rules can be repurposed against the very pluralism they were designed to safeguard, as cases from Poland to Israel to Tunisia illustrate. Contemporary comparative work focuses on coalition governance under polarization, the performance of presidential versus parliamentary systems under stress, judicial independence, and the role of subnational institutions. Methodological debates between large-N quantitative research, case studies, and mixed-methods designs structure how the discipline produces cumulative knowledge.

Key players

Political Communication: Media, Platforms, and the Public Sphere

Political communication research developed alongside the rise of mass media, from radio propaganda studies in the 1930s through television's reshaping of campaigns to the internet-era transformation of the public sphere. The Habermasian ideal of deliberative publics has been progressively challenged by media commercialization, the decline of legacy gatekeepers, and the rise of platform-mediated information environments dominated by a handful of U.S. and Chinese firms. Empirical work has documented how algorithmic curation, micro-targeting, and the attention economy reshape agenda-setting, framing, and political persuasion. The central disputes concern misinformation, polarization, and platform governance. Scholars disagree on whether social media meaningfully causes polarization or amplifies preexisting cleavages, and on the effectiveness of fact-checking, content moderation, and media literacy. Regulatory responses diverge sharply: the EU's Digital Services Act imposes systemic risk obligations on large platforms, the U.S. relies largely on Section 230 and First Amendment frameworks, and authoritarian states pursue direct censorship and 'sovereign internet' models. Generative AI has now added a new layer, raising concerns about synthetic media, automated influence operations, and the integrity of electoral information environments in a year when many countries are holding national elections. Political communication is therefore both a scholarly subfield and a contested terrain of regulation, geopolitics, and democratic legitimacy.

Key players

Resources

News, lessons, and country profiles to prep for Convegno 2026 – "Multilateralism Contested".

Recent reporting to ground your prep

West Bengal Voter Deletion Crisis 2026

Rahul Gandhi Defends Tamil Nadu's Autonomy

India's 131st Amendment Bill

West Bengal Voter Deletion Crisis

Lessons

Bite-sized lessons to build the basics

Engagement Strategies

Hidden Stakeholders

Dynamic Analysis

Stakeholder Mapping Workshop

Courses

Guided courses that go deeper on the topic

Media & Press Relations

Persuasion & Influence

Cross-Cultural Communication

Advanced Negotiation

The states in play, with the data that shapes their stance

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

Country dossier

By committee

Frequently asked questions

Convegno 2026 – "Multilateralism Contested"

Sep 3–5, 2026Trento, ItalyIn-person

Starts in 26 daysRegistration open

Committees & topics

Topics
Multilateralism Contested: The Strain on the Post-1945 Order · Political Regimes and Transitions: Democratic Backsliding and Authoritarian Resilience · Political Theory and Political History: Rethinking Legitimacy in an Age of Crisis · Comparative Politics and Institutions: Variations in Governance Performance · Political Communication: Media, Platforms, and the Public Sphere · Participation, Social Movements, and Interest Representation

Why it matters

How to prepare

Country perspectives

Where the most-relevant 8 countries stand on the core issues in play. Click through for the full country profile.

United States

Role in topic

China

Increasingly active in multilateral forums, often advocating for reforms that reflect a multipolar world order and its growing global influence, while also pursuing bilateral initiatives.

Role in topic

Russia

Often critical of what it perceives as Western-dominated multilateralism, advocating for a more balanced international system and asserting its national sovereignty.

Role in topic

Germany

A strong advocate for robust multilateralism and international cooperation, often playing a leading role in European and global initiatives.

Role in topic

Brazil

Seeks to strengthen multilateral institutions, particularly those that can amplify the voice of developing nations and promote a more equitable global order.

Role in topic

India

Navigates between strategic autonomy and engagement with multilateral frameworks, often seeking to reform institutions to better reflect contemporary power dynamics.

Role in topic

Hungary

Exhibits a nationalistic approach, often challenging the authority of supranational bodies and prioritizing national sovereignty over certain multilateral commitments.

Role in topic

Türkiye

Pursues a foreign policy that balances engagement with Western multilateral institutions with a growing emphasis on regional influence and strategic autonomy.

Role in topic