Globalization Study Guide PDF

What is globalization? ( Pfaller and Lerch, Introduction) What is globalization? The term globalization refers to a process of increasing cross-border interactions and transactions in the economic and socio-cultural spheres: Worldwide integration of markets for goods and service Global organizat...

What is globalization? ( Pfaller and Lerch, Introduction) What is globalization? The term globalization refers to a process of increasing cross-border interactions and transactions in the economic and socio-cultural spheres: Worldwide integration of markets for goods and service Global organization of production processes through transnational companies Increasing integration of financial and labor markets Increase in cross-border information flows (Source: Pfaller and Lerch , p.1) What is globalization? Quantitative vs. Qualitative approach Market (neo-liberal) vs. Politically-controlled process Non-zero-sum-game (all can win) vs. Zero-sum-game (victory for some = loss for others)  Center – periphery (world level) Among countries with similar level of development Within every state Share-holding vs. Stake-holding approach in decision-making Limited state suggestion vs. Fragile (failed) state danger Should also include politics (democratization), what about culture? What role for regional cooperation? (defense against globalization or just another name of globalization, e.g. EU) At the beginning of current process of globalization (1980s-1990s) the state (state- economy relationship) presented different models (therefore different challenges related to globalization): liberal neo-corporatist social-democratic  “ South European” export-oriented import-substituting state socialism (communism) Liberal model (USA, UK, Canada...): emphasis on market forces; relations between politicians and business leaders kept at the minimum; main source of credit - stock exchange; tolerates higher unemployment; does not tolerate higher inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are not necessary; priority of profits over market share; this model is highly receptive to globalization premises of free goods, services, capitals, and labor movement Neo-corporatist model (Germany, Austria, Italy...): emphasis on politics, not the market forces; relations between politicians and business leaders are welcome; main source of credit - banks; does not tolerates high unemployment; ambivalent toward high inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are necessary; market share over profits; this model is not highly receptive to globalization premises of free goods, services, capitals, and labor movement Social democratic model (Scandinavian countries): emphasis on social egalitarianism - market forces within universal insurance programs; main source of credit - stock exchange; ambivalent toward high unemployment; does not tolerate high inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are possible but not necessary; market share over profits; this model is receptive to globalization premises of free goods, services, and capitals movement “ South European” model (Spain, Portugal, Greece...): society is divided into two parts, those who work for the government (high security) and the rest, where rules the market; main source of credit - foreign investments and foreign bank credits; traditionally tolerant toward high unemployment and high inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are not necessary; this model is receptive to different degrees to globalization premises of free goods, services, capitals and labor movement Export-oriented model (Far East Asia): economy is divided into two parts, those who work for the foreign market (market forces) and those who work for domestic market (politics); sources of credit - foreign investments or bank credits; ambivalent toward high unemployment and high inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are not necessary; this model is partially receptive (export-oriented) and partially non-receptive (domestic-oriented) to globalization Import-substituting model (Latin America, 1930- 1980s, Argentina intermittently until 2023): emphasis on politics, not the market forces; relations between politicians and business leaders are welcome; main source of credit - banks under state control; does not tolerates high unemployment; ambivalent toward high inflation; organized business interests and labor movement are not necessary; domestic market protectionism; this model is completely non receptive to globalization premises State socialism model (USSR, Soviet bloc, China until late 1970s...): State ownership of main industries, planned economy (no market) ; no independent from state business community and organized labor; main source of credit - state-owned banks; does not tolerates unemployment; does not tolerate inflation; domestic market protectionism; this model is completely non receptive to globalization premises States fall into large groups of winners and losers with intermediate shades (according to state-economy model): winners (no need of profound internal reforms) - liberal, social-democratic losers (incompatible with globalization) - state socialism, import-substitution ambivalent (in need of profound internal reforms) - export-oriented, neo-corporatist, “Southern Europe” New opportunities for state revival in the age of globalization (since 1990s): failed (fragile) states and international mobilization international terrorism  financial crisis of 2008 migration crisis of 2015 COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 environmental crisis wars in Ukraine, Caucasus, Middle East Politics and Globalization International organizations 21-1-2025 What is an International organization? Realist vs. liberal-institutional approaches in international relations, IO is potential to have ordered world, where order does not exclusively rely on power distribution In the process of globalization we would expect: empowerment of IOs (existing and new) moving away from power as physical force toward creating international institutions based on common values There are thousands of international organizations in the world nowadays, first were established in 19th century, the process of multiplications accelerated after World War II. With some notable exceptions, these are purely intergovernmental organizations, if they have permanent bodies (e.g. secretariats, expert committees) they have no autonomous power over member states, they acknowledge state sovereignty, member states have final say whether to join these organizations, whether to sign bilateral or multilateral agreements, whether to stay within these agreements or to quit, if their interests are not served by these agreements or organizations Models of international organizations Intergovernmental model: states cooperating while maintaining their sovereignty Functional and neofuntional model: states delegate functions (with or without further spillover) to international organization Supranational model: states transfer sovereignty to higher organization United Nations Established following World War II, UN now includes almost all independent states plus some autonomous territories, followed on failure of League of Nations (purely intergovernmental organization), goals are to prevent military conflicts and promote international development and cooperation, member states are free to join binding treaties and conventions, the only elements within UN with supranational authority is Security Council (especially Chapter VII) United Nations Increased role in globalization of specialized UN agencies (WB, IMF) or organizations with cooperation agreement with UN (GATT/WTO), they however also acknowledge state sovereignty UN 80 years following the end of World War II does not replace nation-states, it acknowledges their sovereignty and uses “soft power” approach in almost all situations to induce state behavior in desired direction European Union Same reasons as UN, keeping peace and promoting prosperity (development), since 1957 (from 6 to 27 European states now, more candidates), role of European Commission with supranational powers (agreed by member states), 3 pillars (economic, home affairs and justice, international security), only economic pillar is subject to supranational authority (qualified majority), other 2 pillars require consensus among EU members, EU promotes limited supranationalism and simultaneously protects EU from unlimited market globalization Comparison between UN and EU UN: peace and cooperation, universal, unlimited state sovereignty, possibility of imposing decisions on states in very specific situation, such decisions are imposed rarely EU: peace and cooperation, regional, limited states sovereignty, possibility to increase or decrease the scope of activities where state sovereignty is limited, such decisions are imposed frequently even if consensus is considered preferable Final thoughts Intergovernmental model: looking for consensus, no supranational authority with automonous from member states political power (most IO) Neofunctional model: creating supranational authority in particular sectors, with (EU) or without (UN) possibility of enlargement (spillover) Supranational model: transfer of political decision- making from state level to supranational authority (very rare) Politics and Globalization Civil society 28-1-2025 What is civil society? Community of citizens linked by common interests and (possible) collective action (working together to achieve common goal), means vary from peaceful discussion to violent revolution and anything in between In the process of globalization we would expect: empowerment of civil society compared to state actors increased “problem of collective action” What is “problem of collective action”? Also known as “free-rider problem”, this is situation in which people who are interested in particular policy outcome (public good) are not participating in this policy with their individual action (time, money, other resources) because others are more motivated, globalization creates opportunities to enlarge the pool of “free-riders” without necessarily enlarging the pool of people collectively acting to promote and maintain public goods consistent with their interests (e.g. freedom, environment, spread of information) To understand, in general, civil society and its (possible) collective actions, we need to imagine state-society relationship, which are represented by different models: Liberal model : state allows civil society self- organization as long as it does not threatens public order, multiple organizations in same area are possible, state uses social expertise to justify public policy, civil society organizations compete for public and private financing and for public attention to promote their agenda, civil society mainly uses peaceful means for influencing politics (discussions, manifestations, petitions...) Neo-Corporatist model : state allows civil society organization, but these organizations are frequently monopolistic in particular area (one organization representing interests of workers, business community, women, youth...), state negotiates with each of these organizations in particular policy context, the results of these negotiations are ultimately promoted as state policy, civil society thus organized always uses peaceful means for influencing politics (discussions, negotiations, formal contacts with elected officials...) State dirigiste model : state tolerates independent civil society organization, these organizations are highly politicized, state tries to promote public policy independently from social pressures, political arena looks like battle ground where state meets social mobilization, civil society can use all the spectrum of means to achieve its goals (prevent government of achieving its goals), very frequently mass social mobilization spills over street confrontation, forcing public opinion to choose side between the government and opposing social interests Authoritarian model : state does not tolerate independent civil society organization, these organizations (if they exist) are persecuted, state prefers having no organized social interests (social atomization), state tries to promote public policy independently from social pressure, political arena is quiet for long periods with spectacular outbursts of violent social mobilization once in a while, civil society when it finally organizes frequently uses violent means to achieve its goals Totalitarian model : main difference between this model and authoritarian model is that totalitarian state imposes social organization, everyone everywhere anytime must be organized in top- down social organizations (residence, work, school, women, youth, elder), state policy is represented as fulfilling interests of particular social groups, the reality is the opposite (society must approve top-down decisions), society is taken co-responsible for government actions In the process of globalization, state - civil society models also fall into large groups of winners and losers with intermediate shades: winners (no need of profound internal reforms) - liberal losers (incompatible with globalization) - authoritarian and totalitarian ambivalent (compatible in some areas, not compatible in others, in need of reforms) - neo- corporatism, dirigisme Politics and Globalization Local communities 4-2-2025 What is local community? A group of people living in a specific area (smaller than nation- state) sharing common interests and values. It is different from civil society (community of citizens linked by common interests and collective action, presented 1 week ago) In the process of globalization we would expect: empowerment of local communities rise of multiculturalism (interculturalism) global cultural melting-pot Some trends since 1945: National-liberation movements (a.k.a. decolonization) UN members increase from 51 to 193 (only 20 ethnically homogeneous states), over 3,000 ethnic groups with over 7,000 languages (e.g. Kurds - 30 million; Romani - 12 million), recent revival of local cultures in different areas (European Union, Americas, Russia), United Nations declared two international decades of indigenous peoples (1995-2004; 2005-2014), United Nations also declared international decade of indigenous languages (2022-2032) To understand, in general, how globalization affects local communities, we need again to start from state-society relationship, which are represented by different models: Liberal model : 19th century trend to assimilate minorities considered progressive, elimination of aristocratic privileges and discrimination, somewhere this process takes over 100 years, liberal democracy synonymous with majoritarianism , in which some minority groups remain permanently in minority, because of the entrenched nature of their main identity characteristics (race, mother tongue, religion) Liberal model (cont.) : Since World War II, first in some European countries (e.g. Netherlands, Belgium), later outside Western Europe (Americas), majoritarian vision of liberal democracy gradually replaced by consociational vision, in which the goal of political representation is not anymore having 50%+1 (votes, seats) but as many as possible or at least representing all main communities, in some countries this process leads to special constitutional amendments (e.g. through power sharing, decentralization), in other countries prevail unofficial arrangements (e.g. quotas for minority representatives) Liberal model (cont.) : Canada follows the same path in the last 2 centuries, from assimilation of minorities in the past to official multiculturalism nowadays (interculturalism in Quebec), from exclusion of indigenous peoples from political life until 1960 (right to vote) to recognition of their right of self-government (1995), forms of self- government may vary from one local community to another, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), ratified by Canada (2021), calls for national governments and indigenous peoples to work together in partnership and respect Authoritarian model : state (not always) does not tolerate local communities, opting instead (not always) for public support from the largest ethnic group (e.g. Russian Empire before 1917, Spain under Francisco Franco), minorities frequently used as scapegoats ( pogroms ) for diverting public attention away from economic mismanagement, exceptions apply to political regimes relying on one among the minorities (e.g. Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Syria under Assad) Totalitarian model : to understand what type of treatment is reserved to local communities we must start from official ideology, Nazi Germany relied on exclusion (and ultimate extermination) of minorities, Soviet Union relied officially on recognition and equality of ethnicities up to giving them internal political self-governance (Russia today inherited this model) Cultural assimilation or gradual disappearance of minority cultures by accepting more prestigious cultural identificators (e.g. rising use of English and other global languages), affects local communities which have no resources to keep alive their cultures, over 3,000 languages or 43% of all languages spoken by 88 million people are considered endangered and will most probably be extinct in the next 50 to 100 years