Democracy’s future depends on intergenerational justice. The next UN Secretary-General must help deliver

Younger generations are flexing political muscle worldwide, breaking silence and expectations both on the streets and at the ballot box. But even when their marches and votes lead to political change, that is only the start. The real question, and a real cause for hope, is if this generational mobilization can enable more fundamental changes to the fabric of our societies, economies, and politics. Democracies should advance systemic reforms—political, social, and economic—that respond to the problems young people are calling out. And as the world prepares to select the next Secretary-General of the United Nations later this year, UN Member States should choose a person who will embody and deliver this opportunity.

Last year’s Gen Z protests rocked the Indo-Pacific and beyond, from Madagascar to Indonesia. Youth marched in the streets condemning inequalities and demanding change. In Nepal and Bangladesh, the protests led to decisive changes in government.

On the other side of the world, the 2024 presidential election in the United States saw the 18-24 age group break with decades of allegiance to the Democratic Party and split nearly evenly between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Trump’s promise of an aggressive rupture with the status quo was influential in this shift (which has since reversed).  

Young people are right to feel frustration. Across the G20 group of leading economies, the median age is 39; but the median age among their heads of state and government is well above 60. The situation worsens as the circle widens, with last year’s re-election of 92-year-old Paul Biya in Cameroon, in a vote plagued by irregularities, exemplifying political stagnation.  

Even more problematically, the leaders’ policies reflect their age. Too many governments are standing back as a growing gap between median incomes and housing costs prices younger generations out of the market. National budgets firewall pension plans but do little to help young people hopping from one unpaid internship to another gig job. These aren’t just #FirstWorldProblems: youth in developing countries face the greatest barriers to moving up the income ladder.

On top of this lies an ever-more-uncertain future. Will one old man tank the financial markets that made him and his generation the wealthiest in history? Why should he and the other eight men with nuclear buttons (median age: 72) be trusted with existential power? Will artificial intelligence take our jobs—or create a new age of prosperity? As temperatures and sea levels rise, how much longer will the planet itself remain habitable?

These are the things, real and plausible, that keep young people up at night. And this is what makes it hard for them to trust institutions designed in another time and often led by people who do not represent their interests. Young people see our age of radical uncertainty with clear eyes. They are asking for political leaders and structures that meet the moment. Both democracy and the UN should reflect these reasonable demands.

Amid all the transformation of the past decades, the mechanisms of democracy have changed remarkably little. The electoral franchise has expanded greatly within and among countries, and there have been some local innovations in political participation. But by and large, the core model of representative government based around a mostly predetermined electoral cycle and a single static legislature has been passed down from one generation to the next.  

That speed and concentration of decision-making no longer suffice. We need democratic policy and participation at the pace of the polycrisis. And if reforms to democratic systems are to be effective and credible, they will need to be complemented by reforms to economic and social systems. Ultimately, democracy is about the equal distribution and exercise of power. Improvements in electoral or legislative fairness only go so far if power structures remain unequal outside of formal politics.

Meanwhile, the international system is challenged by the same conditions of stagnation and inequality. The selection of the next UN Secretary-General—a position that still holds enormous potential influence as a peacemaker and thought leader—offers a chance to set a new and more inclusive course. If the UN is to regain its relevance for the next generation, it must reassert its ability to act on the critical issues of the day, including intergenerational equity. That can only happen through the personal leadership of the Secretary-General.

The selection process must reflect regional rotation (Latin America is next in line—the last Secretary-General from the region was Javier Perez de Cuellar in the 1980s) and gender (there has never been a woman in the role). But as the effects of today’s myriad crises and stalemates—from financial instability to skills gaps to mental health struggles—fall disproportionately on young people, the next UNSG should also emphasize and represent intergenerational justice.  

Having a younger person in the role would be a powerful symbol of the UN’s continued vitality. The average age of the five current contenders is 67: a decade older than the average of all previous SGs at the time they took office. But even older candidates can gain credit by prioritizing young people’s concerns in their visions for reform, reconciliation, and recruitment, building on the establishment of the UN Youth Office in 2022.

The actions and words of our youngest citizens manifest a profound and well-founded anxiety. That concern should be an impetus for renewal and reform: to make democracy and multilateralism more trusted, more diverse, and more innovative—and thus better able to do the hard work to reform society more broadly. With democracy and more on the precipice, it’s time to embrace the energy and direction of a new generation.

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the institutional position of International IDEA, its Board of Advisers or its Council of Member States.