Globalisation: Now It's Personal
By Michael Bates
Ireland has been crowned "The Worlds Most Globalised" country by a recent study published in the US. Another interesting brand for this Celtic Tiger of ours, but what does it mean?
It seems like a huge concept. Too big for mere mortals to even attempt to understand, never mind influence. But if a little island on the edge of Europe can become the Worlds Most Globalised country, maybe its time to bite the bullet and find out some more. In an attempt to understand what globalisation means I attended a conference recently in UCD, entitled Globalisation: Implications for the Developed and Developing World. The event was hosted by the Religious Society of Friends in Ireland (Quakers) who have been monitoring global development for many years now and have a policy of "speaking truth to power".
Many of the speakers were unhappy with the term globalisation, maintaining that it is too vague to describe the many interconnected phenomena that are encompassed by it. Professor Kevin O'Rourke Director of the Centre for the Economics of Globalisation, Trinity College Dublin, holds this view and says that "it leads to a polarisation of view points" and hence a less constructive discussion of the issues involved. In the past the argument has been pretty much split down the middle, for or against but this would appear to be a counterproductive approach. Speaking on this topic recently Mary Robinson, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said "the time has come to move beyond the arguments for or against globalisation. Our task is to ensure that the promise globalisation holds for fostering higher standards of living and more open and inclusive societies are realised for all people".
Whether we like it or not, today it is an almost invisible part of our every-day lives. Decisions like what brand of chocolate you buy or whether or not you drive to work in the mornings all impact on the global economy. Soon the school your child goes to, the hospital you attend or even the water you drink from your own tap could be owned by transnational corporations (see GATS below). The generic drugs used in poorer areas, because they are cheaper, could be outlawed (see TRIPS below), all in the name of Free Trade.
The current economic paradigm is based on an assumption that growth and the liberalisation of markets are good and lead to all-round prosperity. The bodies who shape international policy hold these beliefs. The World Bank Group, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) are making decisions and creating policies that affect us all. But who are they and what do they want?
The World Bank Group was formed to help with the reconstruction of Western Europe after the Second World War. When Europe recovered it turned its attentions towards developing economies where it says that it wants to "advance economic growth and reduce poverty". It does this by lending to developing countries for the improvement of infrastructure and other projects judged to increase economic efficiency (financial liberalisation); by financing private sector projects in developing countries, now a major role of the World Bank, and by giving Structural Adjustment Loans (SALs), working closely with the IMF, to governments of developing countries who agree to undertake economic reforms (financial liberalisation).
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) was established in 1945, in direct response to the perceived causes of the depression of the 1920's and 1930's, to encourage monetary order. This has altered with time and now the IMF plays an important role financing developing countries and in financial crisis management. It currently has a membership of 183 countries. Decisions are made on a rule of "one dollar, one vote" which means that the US holds 17.49% of any vote while Bangladesh holds only 0.25%.
In the past IMF "structural adjustment programmes" have enabled countries to become financially viable but have done so with enormous social costs. The IMF has acknowledged this and has introduced Poverty Reduction Strategies. It is too early to say whether these new measures work or not.
The World Trade Organisation (WTO), formed in 1995, has evolved from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) which came about at the end of the Second World War. GATT was drawn up to promote trade in goods through tariff reduction again in response to the depression of the 1920's and 1930's when countries raised "trade barriers" to protect their own interests. The WTO now encompasses GATT, an agreement on Trade Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Hence the reference to cheap generic drugs and your tap water above.
According to Barry Coates, Director of the World Development Movement, "globalisation has been constructed; its most recent building blocks being the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO". Coates also maintains that "there is mounting evidence that financial liberalisation harms poorer countries. For example, 77 of the worlds poorest countries experienced lower growth in the period 1980 to 2000 than the previous twenty year period". In the countries which have achieved economic growth "very few (mostly the wealthy) have benefited" leading to "private affluence and public squalor".
If globalisation is not helping poorer countries whom is it benefiting? In whose interest are these decisions being made? It is interesting to note that some would equate globalisation with Americanisation, a point raised at the UCD conference by Mary Banotti M.E.P. This would seem to make some sense when you consider that most of the transnational corporations on the world stage appear to be American. Yes, the US can be bullish and can get away with it because of its sheer might. Yes America is the richest country in the world yet gives the lowest share in Aid. But does the US have the monopoly on greed? It's too easy to blame the Americans. Surely the Western Powers have a shared responsibility.
The issue of responsibility is one that arose time and again during the conference. Governments today have global responsibilities, but there appears to be a lack of will to address the problems caused by unfettered globalisation. Non Government Organisations and activists have had some success in bringing issues into the public forum and also in putting pressure on governments to take these issues seriously.
Various solutions were proffered by the speakers at UCD and there was consensus on a number of the suggestions. These included policing the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO, democratising their structure and making their decisions more transparent; the introduction of a comprehensive, sustainable development agenda based on equity; changing the emphasis of economic policy to include social and commercial measures; and a new financial architecture to support these changes.
But as citizens of a globalised world do we have any personal responsibilities in this regard and if so what can you or I do? I put this question to the panel and the response was pretty uniform. We should inform and educate ourselves about the issues involved. We should monitor the various bodies and agreements and we should make sure that this is an issue of which our own local TD's are aware.
Globalisation is an elusive, ever-shifting target, an interwoven mesh of trade in goods, trade in capital, labour issues, international debt, migration, technological developments, economic policy and Human Rights. As a wise man once said "vigilance is the price of freedom". It would seem that now more than ever we must take this advice and maybe, if we get it right we will attain an ethical, sustainable globalisation based on justice, tolerance and equity and not just economic growth.
For further information go to:
World Development Movement www.wdm.org.uk
One World www.oneworld.net
Trocaire www.trocaire.ie
Centre for the Economics of Globalisation, TCD www.tcd.ie
The Quaker United Nations Office www.quno.org
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) www.wto.org