THE US poll result has taken most by surprise. The polling industry and media pundits have been trying to figure out why their projections predicting a Clinton win failed. There have been several explanations: Clinton’s voters didn’t come out in some places; polls overestimated women’s support for her; more Republicans voted for Trump than expected, etc.

All this appears too conventional and tactical, and perhaps sufficient only to satisfy those within the typical policy bubble. It ignores the reality that even the most basic assumptions about voting behaviour underpinning prediction models have been challenged this time.

Indeed, something truly different seems to have happened here. In fact, the result fits a growing global trend. Consider the recent ‘surprises’. Think Brexit, think the failed referendum in Colombia, think Modi’s rise which the BJP establishment remained uncomfortable with till the writing was on the wall, and even think the defeat of BJP’s ‘India shining’ campaign over a decade ago. You’ll find striking similarities. In each case, mainstream punditry failed. The policy world had a hard time decoding the signals from the electorate and what these meant for the kind of policies we believe leaders should pursue.

The reason lies in the nature of policy bubbles. People within tend to become captive to conventional ways of thinking. The policy world, for instance, takes the sanctity of global governance structures as a given and works narrowly to improve outcomes within these. No one carries a brief to upset the applecart. It seems that voters around the world have taken up this task and become effective at it. What we are experiencing is no less than an outright indictment against the prevailing governance model.

The elite can no longer shape dominant narratives.

The non-elite citizens divorced from policy capitals are telling us the status quo is no longer acceptable. Specifically, they feel they have been left out of the globalisation deal. Policy communities tend to respond by pointing to data that shows that the kind of additional wealth generated by the post-Second World War global capitalist system is unprecedented. Also, that more people have been pulled out of poverty under this system than any other. Both true. And yet, it doesn’t help our case.

The problem isn’t wealth generation, but the accumulation of most of it in the global elite’s hands. The prevailing order has reinforced this trend. And precisely because there is more wealth floating around than ever before, the angst for those who are not being able to access it is more punctuated.

Tie this to the fact that we’re at a point where many may reasonably feel that the globalisation promise has been given a fair chance to deliver. Even if one were to consider the end of the Cold War as the point when globalisation was able to truly begin asserting itself, it is now three decades hence. A generation and a half has lived through it. More people than we’d like or expect seem convinced it isn’t working. They don’t seem to be seeing this as a learning curve, but a permanent state of unfulfilled expectations.

Perhaps the most important enabler here is the information revolution. Access to instant information and communication channels means the policy elite can no longer shape dominant narratives. Social media is increasingly creating popular narratives; these don’t fit neatly with the sophistication the policy bubble is used to.

Average citizens now have free access to global and national policy debates. The more they tune in, they more they must realise just how divorced this discourse is from their daily lives. The glitz of electronic media also makes them appreciate how good life can be for some in this globalised world. For developing country citizens, this translates into an awe factor in their imagination of the developed world. For developed country citizens, the indictment against their own elite seems to be just as damning. The result is identical: a deep-rooted conviction that millions are being robbed of their rightful share in global wealth.

As someone who operates inside the global policy bubble, I must put my hand up. The elite policy enterprise has not done a good job of being inclusive, neither in terms of absorbing input from the millions that the prevailing model supposedly serves nor in terms of challenging aspects of the bubble that are partly responsible for governance failures. I am aware I’ve made generalisations here, overlooked many other factors at play in the US and elsewhere, and ignored examples where electorates may recently have gone the other way. Like others, I have no ready solutions.

But the point I hope no one will dispute is that there is an urgent need for internal correction within policy bubbles around the world. The policy elite must make this happen. No less than the promise of liberal democracy is at stake.

The writer is a foreign policy expert based in Washington, DC.

Published in Dawn November 15th, 2016