A paper published in Finland by the famous Kalevi Sorsa Foundation (social democrat oriented) , and written by Vivien A. Schmidt. She is Jean Monnet Chair of European Integration, Professor of International Relations at Boston University and  visiting Professor at Sciences Po, Paris,  at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Vienna, the European University Institute in Florence, the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, the Universities of Paris and Lille, and visiting scholar at Nuffield College, Oxford University and at Harvard University, where she is currently a faculty affiliate in the Center for European Studies. This paper prepared for presentation for the Kalevi Sorsa Foundation Conference “Global Capitalism, Privatization, and the Challenges to Democracy”  which took place in Helsinki (7-8 November 2008)

Extract:

As for global governance, perhaps could also get to the stage where we could have a ‘treaty to end all treaties’ in a range of areas, to find a way out of the lowest common denominator approach to treaties. But where we cannot, as with labor issues, perhaps this is where the new social democratic activism should kick in. With regard to international labor standards, for example, one could use a system of ‘Ratcheting Labor Standards’ (RLS) based on the kinds of competitive over-sight practices already operative in other areas, to create competition among MNCs to engage in continual improvement of their treatment of labor, through monitoring via NGOs, and standards-setting bodies (Fung, Sabel and O’Rourke 2008).
And why not reconsider the Tobin tax on global financial transactions, rejected in the past because it appeared too difficult to implement? The technology is now clearly available. And we definitely need some means of funding a financial lending institution of last resort, of alleviating global poverty-especially in light of the financial crisis-and/or of paying for the energy adjustments related to climate change, in particular for developing countries.
Ideas for new social democratic policies and practices, in short, are the real issue. If the past thirty years have been the neo-liberal response to the postwar social democratic moment, then the next thirty years could and should constitute the ‘new social-democrat’ (or ‘new progressive’ in the US) response to the response. But 21st century ideas have to be built on the new understandings that have been arrived at over the neo-liberal period, about the importance of individual responsibility, of non-state solutions to collective action problems wherever possible,
of decentralization of government and subsidiarity. And they also need to bring back in ideas about social justice that have never entirely been abandoned in the neo-liberal period, and a renewed acceptance of the importance of governance for, by, of, and with the people. Let us hope that, were Rip Van Winkle to go back to sleep yet again, thirty years hence he will reawaken to a new tomorrow of a more balanced neo-social democratic neo-liberalism rather than simply finding that we have gone full circle, and are ready for the next neo-neo-liberal onslaught.

The full article on Kalevi Sorsa Foundation website