Presentation on theme: "Globalization and governance What can Theories of Political Economy tell us? in an age that combined globalization and uncertainty about US global leadership,"— Presentation transcript:
Globalization and governance What can Theories of Political Economy tell us? in an age that combined globalization and uncertainty about US global leadership, how do you organize the international political economy?
What is Globalization? Growth of networks of interdependence that transcend national and regional boundaries Economic networks – Trade – Capital flows – Labor migration Communication and transportation networks – Networks linking soldiers, criminals, terrorists – Advocacy networks – Religious organizations
The “dark side” of globalization More access to goods and services…….but greater illegal trade in arms, people, drugs, money. More goods transported across the globe…..but they can bring in toxic toys, invasive species, contaminated food Ease of internet access expands free speech but can put porn in children's hands, facilitate reckless investments, intellectual theft Movement of people expands freedom but can spread deadly diseases.
The Dilemma Economics is global but…… But Isn’t this the neo- liberal vision? Politics is local Local (national) politics can’t handle global issues…..
Local government won’t work under globalization……. Because Globalization undermines state sovereignty National governments can’t protect their citizens from global “bads”…..
And there could be a backlash….. Illiberal democracy because…… – Globalization Econ. Insecruity retreat from national identity retreat into ethnic and sectarian identities feeling of “belonging” and security exclude others from democracy “Jihad” because….. – Excluvity can lead to separation and fragmentation of political communities who might want the same land conflict
So….What to do about the dark side? Delegate authority upwards Delegate authority downwards Hybrid of public-private authority
What guidance can theories of political economy give for the governance of globalization? Economic Nationalism (Waltz) Distributive justice Liberal Theory – governance by private actors – Multilateral institutions Global communitarianism
Global Public Governance International Organizations? What are the benefits?
Problem 1: Further usurping of sovereignty….
Problem 2:They are undemocratic No transparency No accountability Technocrats rule! No role for elected representatives PERIOD!! Voting by APPOINTED rep. – No role for congress! – No wonder congress won’t ratify treaties! Undermine economic and social rights What about “global federalism?” (Rodrick)
Problem 3: And ineffective Collective action problems Economic nationalism often rears its head Global institutions can be ignored They have a long way to go…… What about global leadership? Example of governance in the current financial crisis……
Example: Can the IMF govern the global economy?
Who is the Lender of last resort? The IMF? Resources increased by $500 billion $40 billion from China (loan) (not confirmed) – $100 billion from Japan and EU (promised before G20) – Still need $260 billion….. $10 billion promise from Canada $4.5 billion promise from Norway $100 billion promise from U.S. Mexico has already requested $47 billion line of credit Will the IMF become a global Central Bank?
Will the US come to the rescue and again take on the role of global hegemon Everyone Chill Out! II Got this!
IMF voting power: US can still veto
Lender of Last Resort? The Fed and Central Bank coordination
Dollar strengthened as world’s reserve currency? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Taking in the world’s distressed goods? Now it’s toxic assets U.S.Promise not to close its market Other G20 countries promised too Are bail-outs of domestic industries acts of protectionism?
Is the US is an unconscious Hegemon? Was the US always an unconscious hegemon? Does the world really need a hegemon in Kindelberger’s sense? Will international institutions do the trick? Or will everyone keep their markets open because they have learned that it is the best thing to do?
Can the U.S. afford this?
And now back to the Arctic…. Can global governance solve the problems we discussed on Tues?
The two (or really three) tragedies Warming Opens Arctic Resources Scientific studies aid in resource Exploitation International scramble for Arctic Resources And Privatization Competition, Conflict Growing resource depletion Global warming, melting ice
The Polar Regions as global commons Antarctic is defined by treaty as global commons Antarctic is governed as global commons Antarctic treaty treats science as “common good” In contrast, Arctic regional governance is restricted to Arctic states
Antarctica as a global Commons Antarctic: Earth's only continent without a native human population,Earthcontinent and a land mass surrounded by ocean makes definition as a “global Commons” easier and Antarctic Governance as a “commons” Unique all land and ice shelves southice shelves of 60°S latitude parallel.parallel The treaty has now been signed by 46 countries,
Does it work? Members dedicated to scientific research But states have to continue to place a high priority on environmental protection. Can clash with private goals
And there is a conflict between science and environmental NGOs…… The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR) was established to continue co-operative scientific research. Even so, the scientific community clashes with environmental organizations. SCAR is chronically short of money. It relies on national committees made up of scientists who in large measure are dependent on the public purse. Governments wishing to ignore scientists could still do so. Alone, the SCAR would not have a lot of direct influence.” In the absence of support from other international actors of influence scientific interests are unlikely to prevail when in conflict with other interests.
Turning to the Arctic: Can it too be treated as a Global Commons? It is different…… It is an ocean surrounded by land Contains a local population including Indigenous inhabitants Governance is thus subject to sovereignty Claims, some disputed
Arctic is not defined as a global commons Though science treats it as a “global commons,” the Arctic is not governed by an international treaty Whereas the Antarctic is a special conservation area, the inhabitants of the Arctic make use of the region’s rich natural resources for their livelihood and social and economic development.
What about the Arctic Council?
international cooperation in the Arctic Council….. A large part of the work of the Arctic Council is science-based. Different working groups engage in efforts to fill the gaps in existing circumpolar knowledge, covering new areas or areas where information has been either scarce or hard to access. Examples: two major assessments of pollution in the Arctic, showing, among other things, rising trends of mercury contamination in some areas of the region and the Arctic Human Development Report on cultural, social and economic conditions in the Arctic.
So if global governance doesn’t work (or is imperfect), what about Private governance? Just who, exactly, would govern? What are the benefits? Example: success despite failure of Kyoto Other environmental issues
Still no democracy…… Imagine Golden here…..
Private and global governance: the absence of distributive justice
But what about NGO’s and Individuals?
Where does the economic nationalist stand on the issue of governing globalization? The soft-core economic nationalist – Don’t like public or private governance because….. The Hard-core economic nationalist – Think both are silly because…….
The common theme in the criticism…. Banning politics in the name of economic efficiency is not a good idea !!!