Inequality is a major global issue, destroying the social cohesion necessary for stability and security, the subject of Sustainable Development Goal 10. Poverty results from failures of redistribution within the economic system, stagnating wages, chronic unemployment and lack of opportunity, while less attention has been paid to the increasing global wealth going to the already wealthy as returns on capital, producing a social backlash. A new multilateral specialized agency should be created within the reformed UN system specifically to address growing economic inequality and to promote more equitable distribution of the world’s resources. While some countries have advanced, inequality between states remains a long-term problem, with development aid failing to address root causes. Various options and policies are available to redress global inequality between and within countries, including progressive taxation, employment creation, gender equality, a universal basic income and other provisions for social security. Design principles for a more just and sustainable economy are reflected in the UN 2030 Agenda. One priority is to establish a global regulatory framework for social and environmental responsibility in the private sector, creating a level playing field for business. Another is to rethink the global economic and financial architecture.

Builds on the theory of energy tariff regulation to explain the delicate balancing of investors’ and consumers’ concerns in Central Asia’s energy laws and regulations, as well as in judicial and regulatory practice in Central Asia. The social compact governing energy pricing, the negative perception of profit and popular frustration with the mismanagement of utilities makes finding the right balance between utilities and consumers’ interests one of the most significant challenges for tariff reform in general, and for reform in Central Asia in particular. Given the institutional obstacles to tariff reform, efforts to improve tariff legislation are of limited effectiveness in the absence of guarantees of enforcement of the utilities’ rights. Surprisingly, judicial practice in Central Asia (in particular in Kazakhstan) demonstrates that, in countries where the judiciary is friendly towards the government, the courts still have a key role to play in enforcing the tariff laws. This role is quite different to that usually advocated in the rule of law and market reform literature. The case of Kazakhstan illustrates how the courts can contribute to the legitimation of tariff reform by shifting the blame for tariff increases from the government onto the judiciary, thereby helping win public acquiescence in much-needed tariff reform.