Hello everyone
I’d like to ask about which “its” refer to in the following context and about the meaning of “has overtaken the leisurely reflection on its future”:
Endless but ineffectual theorizing seems to be particularly endemic in the field of international labour migration where the inclination of international agencies is to focus on issues and problems from a global or universal perspective at the expense of the narrower focus on local concerns of organizations and/ or individual countries. This is as much a consequence of the unresolved debate on national sovereignty versus multilateralism that has confounded the United Nations system since its inception more than 50 years ago along with the slow but gradual appreciation of the significance of the role that migration plays in national and international development.
There continues to be a wide gap between what is and what ought to be and while such a gap may have been a matter of limited concern in the past, rapid developments brought about by globalization has overtaken the leisurely reflection on its future and triggered a rush of studies and initiatives within the last few years such as the Global Commission for International Migration, the recently concluded ILO Conference which had migration as the sole item of the agenda and the Berne Initiative among others.
I’m not sure about the following thing: future of what – globalization, migration or international development?
And what’s the meaning of “has overtaken the leisurely reflection on its future”? Does it mean “has gradually made us think about its future”?