sábado, 18 de octubre de 2014
Ashaninkas, Chikungunya and Community Particpation; A note.
The Ashaninka Nation in Río Ene, Peru has in its mythology the notion of a land of eternal abundance, and the concept of a circular universe bounded by rivers; this Nation is located in the Central Jungle, in the Pichanki, Satipo, and San Martin de Pangoa districts, province of Chanchamayo, Junin. I know deep this region for my rural internship with Dr. Manuel Quimper, by the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia - UPCH . The family groups have a territory of settlement ranging from Huanuco and San Martin perhaps until Ucayali, also distributed by the Huallaga and Ucayali rivers, afluent to the Amazonas. This groups and families, that arenot more then communities, tell us that the concept of villages, population centers and native communities is more a concept of missionaries and urban concept. The Ashaninka lived fishing and hunting and collecting, and their agriculture is simple (corte y quema ), and they rotated to new land every 10 or 20 years. They moved out to find new lands , and after a period when they were visiting and settling through through relationship with family and compadres, always in periods of 10 0 20 years, they return to original land. This was systematized with Centro de Investigacion y Promocion Amazonica (CIPA) , and I later returned for a research in the area in leishmaniasis. Leishmaniasis is a disease related only to poor inmigrants from the andean zone (colonos) that work in activities related to cutting virgin jungle forest areas, with the abundant literature of Revista Anthropologica, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru . My interest arose earlier, from the course of Tropical Medicine, in the Facultad de Medicina de la Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, on our trip to Iquitos when Dr Ciro Maguiña was resident, and Dr Eduardo Gotuzzo was a young physician at the Institute of Tropical Medicine Alexander von Humboldt, and its was Director Dr. Hugo Lumbreras Cruz (RIP). Actually, Dr Maguiña and Dr Gotuzzo are directors of the Institute, which I must say have recently receive a recognition of UNESCO for their work to humanity. Writing this note is memories, related to being a member of the Association of Students (AECH), with Jaime Calmet currently a researcher for CIPA in Cusco, and I clearly remember that we had organized courses of Health and Society, coordinated by Dr Pedro Brito Quintana (PAHO) and Eugenio Villar Montesinos (WHO) , teacher and resident at the time . But we must go to what is the matter of the note .... the focus is the Chikungunya, Ebola and Neglected Tropical Diseases. The Central Jungle Area was a focus very early in the XX century because of interests in caucho and cacao, and earlier though for catholic missions in the XIX century. First missionaries concentrated tribal families and groups in the Jesuit concept of communities and mills, but the family groups were affected by epidemics, as the population concentrated , including TB for example, very serious and reemerging. The exploitation of rubber attracted attention and migration of peasants from rural andean zones that walked into the zone, and it came to standing that they were advancing on ancestral native lands, hunting areas and areas that historically permited crop rotation. Then appeared malaria and yellow fever, for livestock and deforestation, and their product, mosquitoes and finally the political concept of native communities that was said to be aimed on the defense of natives, defined small territories, impoverishing particularly the Ashaninka and Machiguengas. These water routes that were orientes towards Huallaga and Ucayali reviers and their affluents, these economic relations of families and groups in the Central Jungl Area, this migration of landless peasants from the Andes, is what created conditions, pauperization of land resources, alter ecosystems, created villages without basic conditions, and thus created the basis for tropical diseases , not only malnutrituion and infectious diseases, but diseases transmitted by mosquitoes. And this situation is repeated in the Putumayo river border with Colombia, ... we must remember theories of the first men in Peru and the Jungle theory, we have facts as that the black on red pottery in the Colombian jungle is in the origin of the Chavin style, and that aji or chili come from Central America to Colombia, and was present in the caves of Lauricocha, Huanuco, Peru, most ancient place of man in Peru, and we are talking 14,000 years ago. This ancient routes are the background of a culture, and of an economy, threathened by oil, mining and coca agriculture. This note is what I remember of a conversation with Dr Augusto Meloni officer of MOH in 1995, and what convinced him to request a contract for a year with PAHO on Organization of the Health System in Native networks in Amazon basin, which I assumed, and was later approved as a official document by the Ministry of Health, Dra Pilar Mazzetti. This work, basically consisted to identify households by ethnic groups along affluent rivers, identify trading activity and river transport by motor boats or pequepeques for example, and identify leaders and native authorities, to establish a system of communication and relationship, I also wanted to identify native groups to collect traditional myths, legends, stories and songs and organize them written in native languages for schools... of course this was the first part of the proposal and sought to convene the traditional authority structures of the native race ... things of anthropology and community participation
martes, 14 de octubre de 2014
La corrupción y la fragmentación política amenazan la democracia del Perú
THE ECONOMIST - Bello
Divide y soborno
La corrupción y la fragmentación política amenazan la democracia del Perú
En una encuesta de opinión reciente, casi la mitad de los encuestados dijeron que creían que si Luis Castañeda fue elegido como alcalde de Lima que "iba a robar, pero haría las obras públicas". En las elecciones regionales y locales del Perú el 5 de octubre el Sr. Castañeda, quien niega que él es corrupto, cree debidamente ganado el puesto. Muchos limeños recuerdan que, en el puesto de trabajo en 2003-10, construyó hospitales municipales en las zonas más pobres y escaleras de hormigón en barrios de chabolas.
Elección del señor Castañeda es un testimonio de cinismo de los peruanos sobre los políticos, sobre todo los locales. De los 25 presidentes regionales salientes, 22 están siendo investigados por malversación de fondos. Tres están en la cárcel en espera de juicio; cuarto es un fugitivo. Una de las personas en la cárcel por presuntos sobornos, Gregorio Santos, activista de extrema izquierda contra las empresas mineras, fue reelegido como presidente de la región norteña de Cajamarca, donde se le ve como un mártir político.
En esta sección
La corrupción generalizada en los gobiernos sub-nacionales es en parte una consecuencia de la forma errónea en que Perú ha descentralizado el poder. Desde la época de los virreyes españoles que gobernaron la mitad de América del Sur desde Lima, Perú ha sido excesivamente centralizada. Descentralización siguió una tendencia en las democracias nuevas y restauradas de América Latina. Pero en la práctica, argumenta Alberto Vergara, politólogo, lejos de solucionar los problemas del país, la descentralización se ha agravado porque los líderes nacionales fueron capaces de lavarse las manos de ellos.
El gobierno en 2002 optó por dar estatus regional a 25 departamentos existentes; además, hay 196 provincias y 1.846 municipios-todos para un país de sólo 31 millones de personas. En comparación con Chile o Colombia, el Perú tiene una gran cantidad de duplicación, dice Carlos Casas, ex viceministro de Economía.
Los planes para fusionar regiones fueron derrotadas en referendos. Responsabilidades y dinero se delegan sin tener en cuenta la escasez de gestores cualificados en los gobiernos locales y la falta de auditoría y control sobre sus gastos. En Colombia, por el contrario, los municipios sólo más grandes y con mejores resultados han obtenido el control de la salud y la educación, señala Alberto Rodríguez, del Banco Mundial.
Algunos gobiernos subnacionales han hecho la mayoría de sus nuevos poderes. En los Andes alcaldes han construido carreteras que transforman la economía de su pueblo mediante la conexión a los mercados nacionales. Moquegua, en la costa sur, ahora tiene las mejores escuelas del país. Pero que resiste a la tendencia.
La descentralización coincidió con un auge económico. Los gobiernos locales fueron inundados de dinero, sobre todo las 13 regiones que reciben una destinó 50% de participación en el impuesto sobre la renta pagado por las empresas mineras y petroleras. El resultado es que dos tercios de la inversión pública está ahora a cargo de los gobiernos sub-nacionales. Algunos infrautilización. Pero esta bonanza no controlada ha estimulado la captura de los gobiernos locales por parte del crimen organizado. En Ancash, al norte de Lima, el presidente regional encarcelado acusado de asesinato, espionaje y malversación de fondos a escala industrial.
Hay poco esfuerzo para hacer que los gobiernos locales a rendir cuentas. Eso es en parte porque ellos mismos recogen sólo 1,5% de los ingresos fiscales totales, frente al 6% en Colombia, según el Sr. Rodríguez. Todos menos un par de las regiones están a cargo de los independientes que representan a los movimientos locales ad hoc en lugar de los partidos nacionales. Con más de 100.000 candidatos en 05 de octubre, un escrutinio detallado de sus antecedentes y fuentes de financiación era imposible, señala Carlos Basombrio, un consultor político.
La descentralización es un síntoma de la debilidad de la democracia peruana y no su causa. Las instituciones nacionales se han contaminado, también: el fiscal, Carlos Ramos, y su antecesor son ambos bajo investigación por vínculos con la pandilla de Ancash (que niegan), mientras que decenas de legisladores se enfrentan a acusaciones de corrupción. El gobierno del presidente Ollanta Humala tiene los medios legales de recuperar el poder y el dinero de las regiones disfuncionales, pero ha optado por no hacerlo.
Injerto descentralizada de hoy no está en la escala de la década de 1990, cuando el presidente, Alberto Fujimori, y su jefe de inteligencia, Vladimiro Montesinos, colocan las instituciones nacionales al servicio de un esquema de extorsión inmensa. Pero es especialmente preocupante porque la economía ilegal ha crecido. Perú es actualmente el mayor productor de cocaína del mundo; la extorsión y la minería ilegal y la tala, han proliferado.
Todo esto es una prueba de la debilidad del Estado democrático. El rápido crecimiento económico pueda haber anestesiado peruanos. Pero la economía se está desacelerando. Austeridad encendería intolerancia a la corrupción, y sentar las bases para un populista-simplemente autoritario como el señor Fujimori.
Divide y soborno
La corrupción y la fragmentación política amenazan la democracia del Perú
En una encuesta de opinión reciente, casi la mitad de los encuestados dijeron que creían que si Luis Castañeda fue elegido como alcalde de Lima que "iba a robar, pero haría las obras públicas". En las elecciones regionales y locales del Perú el 5 de octubre el Sr. Castañeda, quien niega que él es corrupto, cree debidamente ganado el puesto. Muchos limeños recuerdan que, en el puesto de trabajo en 2003-10, construyó hospitales municipales en las zonas más pobres y escaleras de hormigón en barrios de chabolas.
Elección del señor Castañeda es un testimonio de cinismo de los peruanos sobre los políticos, sobre todo los locales. De los 25 presidentes regionales salientes, 22 están siendo investigados por malversación de fondos. Tres están en la cárcel en espera de juicio; cuarto es un fugitivo. Una de las personas en la cárcel por presuntos sobornos, Gregorio Santos, activista de extrema izquierda contra las empresas mineras, fue reelegido como presidente de la región norteña de Cajamarca, donde se le ve como un mártir político.
En esta sección
La corrupción generalizada en los gobiernos sub-nacionales es en parte una consecuencia de la forma errónea en que Perú ha descentralizado el poder. Desde la época de los virreyes españoles que gobernaron la mitad de América del Sur desde Lima, Perú ha sido excesivamente centralizada. Descentralización siguió una tendencia en las democracias nuevas y restauradas de América Latina. Pero en la práctica, argumenta Alberto Vergara, politólogo, lejos de solucionar los problemas del país, la descentralización se ha agravado porque los líderes nacionales fueron capaces de lavarse las manos de ellos.
El gobierno en 2002 optó por dar estatus regional a 25 departamentos existentes; además, hay 196 provincias y 1.846 municipios-todos para un país de sólo 31 millones de personas. En comparación con Chile o Colombia, el Perú tiene una gran cantidad de duplicación, dice Carlos Casas, ex viceministro de Economía.
Los planes para fusionar regiones fueron derrotadas en referendos. Responsabilidades y dinero se delegan sin tener en cuenta la escasez de gestores cualificados en los gobiernos locales y la falta de auditoría y control sobre sus gastos. En Colombia, por el contrario, los municipios sólo más grandes y con mejores resultados han obtenido el control de la salud y la educación, señala Alberto Rodríguez, del Banco Mundial.
Algunos gobiernos subnacionales han hecho la mayoría de sus nuevos poderes. En los Andes alcaldes han construido carreteras que transforman la economía de su pueblo mediante la conexión a los mercados nacionales. Moquegua, en la costa sur, ahora tiene las mejores escuelas del país. Pero que resiste a la tendencia.
La descentralización coincidió con un auge económico. Los gobiernos locales fueron inundados de dinero, sobre todo las 13 regiones que reciben una destinó 50% de participación en el impuesto sobre la renta pagado por las empresas mineras y petroleras. El resultado es que dos tercios de la inversión pública está ahora a cargo de los gobiernos sub-nacionales. Algunos infrautilización. Pero esta bonanza no controlada ha estimulado la captura de los gobiernos locales por parte del crimen organizado. En Ancash, al norte de Lima, el presidente regional encarcelado acusado de asesinato, espionaje y malversación de fondos a escala industrial.
Hay poco esfuerzo para hacer que los gobiernos locales a rendir cuentas. Eso es en parte porque ellos mismos recogen sólo 1,5% de los ingresos fiscales totales, frente al 6% en Colombia, según el Sr. Rodríguez. Todos menos un par de las regiones están a cargo de los independientes que representan a los movimientos locales ad hoc en lugar de los partidos nacionales. Con más de 100.000 candidatos en 05 de octubre, un escrutinio detallado de sus antecedentes y fuentes de financiación era imposible, señala Carlos Basombrio, un consultor político.
La descentralización es un síntoma de la debilidad de la democracia peruana y no su causa. Las instituciones nacionales se han contaminado, también: el fiscal, Carlos Ramos, y su antecesor son ambos bajo investigación por vínculos con la pandilla de Ancash (que niegan), mientras que decenas de legisladores se enfrentan a acusaciones de corrupción. El gobierno del presidente Ollanta Humala tiene los medios legales de recuperar el poder y el dinero de las regiones disfuncionales, pero ha optado por no hacerlo.
Injerto descentralizada de hoy no está en la escala de la década de 1990, cuando el presidente, Alberto Fujimori, y su jefe de inteligencia, Vladimiro Montesinos, colocan las instituciones nacionales al servicio de un esquema de extorsión inmensa. Pero es especialmente preocupante porque la economía ilegal ha crecido. Perú es actualmente el mayor productor de cocaína del mundo; la extorsión y la minería ilegal y la tala, han proliferado.
Todo esto es una prueba de la debilidad del Estado democrático. El rápido crecimiento económico pueda haber anestesiado peruanos. Pero la economía se está desacelerando. Austeridad encendería intolerancia a la corrupción, y sentar las bases para un populista-simplemente autoritario como el señor Fujimori.
Inteligemcia emocional: Claves para mejorarla
Inteligencia emocional: Claves para mejorarla
Valora este artículo
Resumen: La inteligencia emocional es importante como concepto que viene a integrar, por primera vez, los factores no cognitivos en la explicación de la inteligencia humana.
Ya hemos hablado antes en Psicopedia de Inteligencia Emocional.
Incluso hemos compartido algunos documentos de gran interés práctico a
la hora de incluir esta variable en nuestro comportamiento y devenir
diario. (Véase por ejemplo “Inteligencia emocional. Guía práctica para la familia”)
Aunque demasiado a menudo abusamos de su
uso, y pese a que autores como Goleman hayan pretendido convertirla en
su particular becerro de oro, no podemos ser ajenos a su importancia
como concepto que ha integrado los factores no cognitivos en la definición y explicación más tradicional de la inteligencia humana.
La Inteligencia emocional suele definirse como la capacidad de comprender, gestionar y expresar efectivamente las propias emociones y sentimientos, así como reconocer y anticipar con éxito las de los demás. Se trata de una habilidad absolutamente esencial en la formación, el desarrollo y la mejora de las relaciones personales, y a diferencia del cociente intelectual, que no cambia de manera significativa durante toda la vida, nuestra Inteligencia Emocional puede evolucionar a medida que crecemos y aprendemos.
El experto en comunicación y autor de algunas obras relevantes en este ámbito, Preston Ni,
ha identificado una serie de factores que considera claves para
desarrollar la inteligencia emocional, y que me ha parecido interesante
compartir:
La capacidad de reducir las emociones negativas
Tal vez el aspecto más importante de la Inteligencia Emocional sea la capacidad para gestionar con eficacia nuestras propias emociones negativas,
para que no lleguen a abrumarnos o afectar a nuestras decisiones. Con
el fin de cambiar la forma en que sentimos acerca de una situación,
primero tenemos que cambiar nuestra forma de pensar en ello. Preston
utiliza dos ejemplos:
1. Reducir la Personalización Negativa.
Se trata de evitar llegar a una conclusión negativa inmediatamente
cuando estamos valorando negativamente el comportamiento de alguien. En
su lugar, debemos proponernos múltiples formas de ver la situación antes de reaccionar.
Por ejemplo, puedo pensar que mi amigo no devolvió mi llamada porque me
está haciendo caso omiso, o puedo considerar la posibilidad de que ha
estado muy ocupado.
Cuando evitamos la personalización de los comportamientos de otras personas, podemos percibirlos de manera más objetiva, reduciendo de este modo la posibilidad de malentendidos que muy a menudo nos complican la vida.
2. Reducir el miedo al rechazo.
Una manera eficaz de gestionar el miedo al rechazo es proporcionarte a
ti mismo múltiples opciones en situaciones importantes. De este modo,
pase lo que pase tendrás alternativas razonables. Se trata de evitar
poner todos los huevos en una misma cesta emocional mediante la
identificación de un Plan B viable, e incluso un plan C.
La capacidad de mantener la calma y manejar el estrés
La mayoría de nosotros experimentamos
algún nivel de estrés en la vida. El modo en que manejamos las
situaciones estresantes pueden marcar la diferencia entre ser asertivo frente a una situación, o por el contrario ser reactivo. Cuando estamos bajo presión, lo más importante es mantener la calma. Preston nos ofrece para ello dos consejos rápidos:
1. Si te sientes nervioso o ansioso, pon agua fría en la cara y busca un poco de aire fresco.
Bajar la temperatura puede ayudar a reducir nuestro nivel de ansiedad.
También evitar las bebidas con cafeína u otros estimulantes similares
reducirá nuestro nivel de estrés.
2. Si estás nervioso, deprimido o desanimado, intenta ejercicios aeróbicos intensos.
La forma en que usamos nuestro cuerpo afecta en gran medida la forma en
que sentimos. Al experimentar la vitalidad del cuerpo la confianza
también crecerá.
La capacidad de ser asertivo y expresar emociones difíciles
“Ser lo que somos exige que podamos
hablar abiertamente sobre las cosas que son importantes para nosotros,
que tengamos una posición clara sobre dónde nos encontramos en problemas
emocionales importantes, y que aclaremos los límites de lo que es
aceptable y tolerable para nosotros en un relación”. Harriet Lerner
Hay momentos en la vida en los que se hace importante establecer nuestros límites adecuadamente.
Estos pueden incluir el ejercicio de nuestro derecho a estar en
desacuerdo (sin ser desagradables), a decir “no” sin sentirnos
culpables, el establecimiento de nuestras propias prioridades, conseguir
lo que merecemos, y protegernos de la coacción y el daño.
Uno de los métodos a considerar cuando
se necesita expresar emociones difíciles es la conocida técnica XYZ – Me
siento X cuando haces Y en la situación Z. Estos son algunos ejemplos:
“Creo firmemente que debería recibir el reconocimiento de mi empresa teniendo en cuenta la calidad de mi trabajo.”
“Me siento incómodo cuando esperas que lo deje todo para estar contigo.”
Es importante evitar el uso de oraciones que comienzan con “tú” y siguen con una acusación o un juicio. Este tipo de lenguaje pone al oyente a la defensiva, y hace menos probable que se abran a lo que tienes que decir.
La capacidad de ser proactivo y no reactivo ante una persona tóxica
La mayoría de nosotros encontramos
personas no razonables en nuestras vidas. Es relativamente fácil dejar
que una persona desafiante nos afecte y nos arruine el día. Preston nos
ofrece de nuevo algunas claves para afrontar este tipo de situaciones:
1. Cuando estás enojado y molesto con alguien, antes de decir algo que podrías lamentar más tarde, toma una respiración profunda y cuenta lentamente hasta diez
(Todo un clásico ¿verdad?). En la mayoría de las circunstancias, en el
momento en que llegues a diez, habrás encontrado una mejor manera de
comunicar tu punto de vista sin necesidad de complicar el problema. Si
aun sigues molesto o irritado después de contar hasta diez, toma un
tiempo fuera si es posible, y retoma el tema después de que te calmes.
2. Un modo muy útil de reducir la reactividad es tratar de ponerse en el lugar del otro, aunque sea tan sólo por un momento., intentando valorar la dificultad de su situación.
Es importante tener en cuenta que las declaraciones de empatía no excusan el comportamiento inaceptable,
pero nos recuerdan que las personas hacen lo que hacen presionados por
sus propios problemas. Mientras estamos siendo razonables y
considerados, los comportamientos de los demás dicen mucho más sobre
ellos que sobre nosotros. Por de-personalización, podemos ver la
situación con más objetividad, y llegar a mejores formas de resolver el
problema.
La capacidad de recuperarse ante la adversidad
La vida no siempre es fácil, y el modo
en que elegimos nuestra forma de pensar, sentir y actuar en relación con
los desafíos de la vida establece la diferencia entre la esperanza
frente a la desesperación, el optimismo frente a la frustración, y la
victoria frente a la derrota.
Desde hace algún tiempo, venimos llamando a esta capacidad “resiliencia”,
y también encontrarás en Psicopedia un buen número de artículos sobre
ella. Con cada situación desafiante que nos encontremos, debemos
hacernos preguntas como “¿Cuál es la lección aquí?”, “¿Cómo puedo
aprender de esta experiencia?”, “¿Qué es más importante ahora?”. Cuanto
mayor sea la calidad de las preguntas, mayor será la calidad de las
respuestas. Hacernos preguntas constructivas, basadas en el aprendizaje y
en nuestras prioridades, nos ayudará a obtener la perspectiva apropiada para hacer frente a la situación en cuestión.
La capacidad de expresar emociones íntimas en relaciones cercanas
La capacidad de expresar de manera
eficaz las emociones es esencial para el mantenimiento de relaciones
personales cercanas. En este caso, “eficaz” significa compartir
sentimientos íntimos con alguien en una relación adecuada, de manera que
alimente la relación y resulte constructivo, así como ser capaz de
responder afirmativamente a la otra persona si hace lo mismo.
El Psicólogo John Gottman llama a la expresión de las emociones íntimas “una oferta”. Esta oferta puede ser cualquier método de conexión positiva entre dos personas que desean una relación cercana. Por ejemplo:
Oferta verbal: “¿Cómo
te va?” “Cómo te sientes?” “Te amo.” “Me gusta cuando hablamos de esta
manera.” “Me alegro de que estemos pasando este tiempo juntos.” “Lo
siento.”
Oferta no verbal: El contacto visual positivo, los abrazos, la sonrisa, las caricias.
Oferta conductual: Ofrecer comida o bebida, hacer un regalo o un favor. Participar en actividades compartidas que crean un vínculo más estrecho.
Según la investigación realizada por
Gottman las relaciones saludables pujan entre sí hasta cientos de veces
al día. De tal modo que la oferta constante y consistente es crucial en el mantenimiento y desarrollo de relaciones cercanas y personales.
Como ves, en la base de la mejora de nuestra inteligencia emocional
se encuentran una serie de habilidades básicas, que están acaparando
por otra parte la atención de la mayoría de estudios e investigaciones
recientes, pero que en realidad han estado siempre presentes en nuestro repertorio de recursos tanto personales como profesionales.
Habilidades como resiliencia, asertividad, empatía o empoderamiento. A ellas me referí en el artículo “Cinco términos imprescindibles reinventados por la psicología actual”, que te invito a releer y que espero te resulte interesante.
martes, 9 de septiembre de 2014
Participacion comunitaria: Ciencia y tecnologia.
¿Porque
"Participacion comunitaria: Ciencia y Tecnologia"?
Porque sus
elementos principales van desde la Educacion de Adultos o Andragogia de
Ludojosky, hasta la Educacion permanente de Jerold Apps;
Porque la
Educacion de Adultos sigue intereses y necesidades, a diferencia de la
Pedagogia o educación de niños;
Porque
debe realizarse en el trabajo y con los elementos del contexto, y para el
análisis requiere de las Ciencias sociales, en especial de la Antropologia:
De otro
lado, porque Participacion comunitaria es ejercicio de Ciudadania, y por tanto requiere de un nivel de conciencia,
de conocimiento de deberes y derechos, y de un nivel de afiliacion, requiere de
un marco de Derechos Humanos, en el ámbito del las Ciencias jurídicas.
Si bien tanto la Educacion como el Derecho no
son propiamente ciencias, sino mas bien Tecnologias, es decir la aplicacion de un
conjunto de las ciencias, también se requiere de las Ciencias sociales, de un
marco Antopologico para comprender las construcciones de las sociedades
comunitarias, para entender la posicion de las mujeres, y para iniciar procesos
sociales o Ingenieria social, de la Psicologia social, pues las personas son el
punto de partida y debe trabajarse con grupos, para que el proceso social tambien
sea un proceso de Educacion liberadora, de la necesaria construccion de
Ciudadania, y de la relacion que existe entre Sociedad y Estado, se requiere de
un marco de Desarrollo económico.
El marco de accion es la Salud, la economia de
la produccion y reproduccion de la fuerza de trabajo, la influencia de los
determinantes sociales de la salud y el desarrollo de las condiciones, capacidades
y el empoderamiento social, por el Derecho a la Salud, el Derecho a la Vida, el
Derecho a la Libertad y el Derecho a la Busqueda de felicidad.
La
Convocatoria: Condición técnico-metodologica
Entre las
condiciones que requiere un proceso de Educacion Permanente en Salud, tenemos la
Convocatoria, que exige la elaboracion del proyecto global con la comunidad, y
en particular el establecimiento de los objetivos educativos, todo lo cual es
en realidad un proceso de Planificacion local participativa.
En este
proceso, debe establecerse claramente las responsabilidades de la comunidad, como esta va a participar en el monitoreo y en
las evaluaciones de medio termino y en la evaluacion final, y los procesos de
transferencia del proyecto hacia la comunidad, y las capacidades requeridas.
Asimismo como van a construirse las relaciones
con los Establecimientos de salud, Defensoria del pueblo y Centros educativos, y
entre los requisitos para la sostenibilidad del proceso educativo, las
relaciones con los Gobiernos locales, para el impacto y transferencia global
del proyecto mas general.
Asimismo, como parte del proceso de
Convocartoria, debe establecerse una Mesa de Coordinacion desde los momentos
preliminares a la operacion del proyecto, pues los procesos de planificacion
son procesos educativos, y de lo que se trata es de apoyar lo que existe y desarrollarlo,
de configurar las bases de un plan de desarrollo distrital y como la funcion
del proyecto global de organizarlo, y con la funcion del proyecto o proceso
educativo de capacitar, desarrollar las capacidades y empoderar socialmente.
Desde un inicio esta Mesa de Coordiinacion es
la encargada de incorpórar a organizaciones e instituciones, promover los
procesos democraticos de eleccion de agentes comunitarios de salud, de difundir
los perfiles que se requiere en funcion del Plan local, de informar quienes van
a ser los capacitadores, promotores y supervisores del plan, que deben ser los
mismo, los mecanismos de evaluacion, el cronograma de reuniones y la estrategia
de visitas, difusion y organización de las elecciones de agentes comunitaris en
los comites vecinales del distrito, de la campaña de comunicacion social y del
lanzamiento del proyecto global.
Mas propiamente, en el programa inicial, los
adultos deben ver claramente reflejados sus intereses, deben participar activamente
en los procesos de seleccion, y deben señalarse claramente como se espera
afrontar la situacion laboral o de empleo.
Por ejemplo con promotoras de salud jovenes, el
perfil es respecto de los centros de salud o el convenio con institutos o
universidades como parte del programa educativo, y con las promotoras amas de
casa, la conformacion de cooperativas de servicios y el convenio con la
municipalidad distrital, o la conformacion de pequeñas empresas por ejemplo
comedores populares.
En los años 80s, estas propuestas estaban enmarcadas
en la movilizacion social de la poblacion y eran consideradas revolcionarias, a
pesar de ser lineamientos internacionales; ya en el siglo XXI, por parte del
Ministerio de Salud, de las Direcciones Regionales de Salud, por parte de las Municipalidades
distritales, y en general por parte de la Cooperacion internacional, en el Peru
se han generalizado, y requieren de un evaluación.
Para la nueva sistematización se puede señalar
que la Educacion Permanente es el proceso planificativo, es el motivador de los
procesos sociales, es la estrategia de la sostenibilidad, es el espacio de
consenso, y como todo proceso de planificacion requiere de Investigacion -
Accion, pues el Plan es como la vida y debe discurrir suavemente, como un manantial.
La
Educacion permanente plantea Contexto y no Curriculum. Condicion de
Planificacion local participativa.
El
curriculum son las experiencias de aprendizaje, y refieren mas a la utilizacion
de multiples medios audiovisuales para la enseñanza, es decir, refiere al aula
y al docente, en cambio la educacion permanente plantea que las necesidades
educativas nacen del contexto, de los problemas que se plantean en el centro de
trabajo y en la vida.
De aqui surgen dos conclusiones para el
personal de salud, las necesidades de salud de la poblacion son los problemas
que se deben enfrentar, y los objetivos educativos de todo proceso capacitante
nacen de estas necesidades.
La otra conclusion, es que la poblacion debe
compartir la definicion de las necesidades de salud, y debe compartir los
procesos capacitantes, pues la planificacion local surge del contexto, de las
necesidades de capacitacion del personal de salud y de las necesidades de la población,
,y además, de una perspectiva intersubjetiva de los actores sociales
involucrados en la solucion de los problemas.
A partir
de las necesidades de capacitacion o educacion permanente, se establece una
proceso participativo, con responsabilidades en la asumpcion de tareas para la
resolucion de problemas, y por tanto en el establecimiento de un Comite que
vaya asumiendo la Planificacion local participativa, a partir de la
Planificacion educativa, asi, todos los actores sociales se convierte en
sujetos, no se habla de docentes sino de facilitadores o promotores, y el
liderazgo se convierte en rotatorio.
Se ingresa asi, en el Momento Explicativo de la Planificacion estrategica,
es decir en la Investigacion - Accion, y por tanto se va definiendo el Momento
Estrategico, es decir los cursos de accion y la acumulacion o empoderamiento
social, a traves de el involucramiento de actores sociales.
La reformulacion de los problemas y necesidades
educativas, la definicion de responsabilidades, y la constitucion del Comite de
Salud, se van construyendo con la definicion progresiva de objetivos y con las
actividades de las personas sobre los
problemas priorizados, y van definiendo el documento Plan,el momento normativo,
y se va acumulando experiencia para el Momento Tactio operacional.
Asi el Plan se convierte no en el documento,
tampoco en el financiamiento, el plan se convierte en el grupo de personas
trabajando por un objetivo, el Plan se convierte en vida, y la Planificacion
educativa en su elemento central, que se va reformulando naturalmente conforme
se van enfrentando los problemas, conforme se gana experiencia y conforme se
van modificando las situaciones planteadas, y se vuelve politica, por el
empoderamiento a nivel local, creandose las condiciones de una
descentralizacion, y mejorandose las condiciones para financiamientos y
autonomia de un sistema local de salud.
Texto Sesion 00385, Conferencia mundial de La Union Internacional de Lucha Contra la TBC, Barcelona 2014. Pedro Enrique Quiñones Figueroa, MD, MPH, Presidente de Mesa.
miércoles, 20 de agosto de 2014
Globalization, Sovereignty and Social Unrest
Journal of Politics and Law; Vol. 5, No. 2; 2012
ISSN 1913-9047 E-ISSN 1913-9055
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Globalization, Sovereignty and Social Unrest
Jennifer Westaway1
1 School of Business Law and Taxation, Curtin University, Australia
Abstract
The world has seen over recent months an increase in the level of social unrest in response to both the imposition by governments of austerity measures and attempts by civilians to overthrow undemocratic and repressive regimes. This unprecedented and extensive level of unrest across diverse political and economic environments has raised many questions as to the causes and consequences, not the least of which is the challenge to the sovereignty of the state and the role of globalization.
This paper will discuss the social unrest consequences of globalization and consider whether globalization has undermined the concept of state sovereignty to such an extent that the social unrest in evidence is in effect the beginning of a new era in international law and international relations.
Keywords: globalization, sovereignty, social unrest, international law
1. Introduction
Over recent months, the world has seen an unprecedented level of political and social unrest sweeping through the Arab world and Greece, as well as Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Whilst it may be convenient to see this unrest as a long term consequence of the global financial crisis and its aftermath, it is arguable that this unrest has its foundation in the failure of countries to understand and address the social consequences of globalization.
There are many descriptions and definitions of globalization and the term is used in many different contexts.
Joseph Stiglitz (2002:9) describes globalization as “…the closer integration of the countries and peoples of the world which has been brought about by the enormous reduction of costs of transportation and communication, and the breaking down of artificial barriers to the flows of goods, services, capital, knowledge, and (to a lesser extent)) people across borders.”. According to Sjolander (1996:604) globalization is “...an economic, political, social, and ideological phenomenon which carries with it unanticipated, often contradictory, and polarizing consequences.”
The International Monetary Fund (1997) has defined globalization as “...the rapid integration of
economies worldwide through trade, financial flows, technology spillovers, information networks, and
cross-cultural currents.” Gunter & van der Hoeven (2004) used the term to mean “the gradual integration of
economies and societies driven by new technologies, new economic relationships and the national
and international policies of a wide range of actors, including governments, international organizations, business, labour and civil society.”
Finally, for the purposes of this paper, Seita (1997: 431) encapsulates the varying definitions when he states that globalization “…is a multifaceted concept encompassing a wide range of seemingly disparate processes, activities and conditions…connected together by one common theme: what is geographically meaningful now transcends national boundaries and is expanding to cover the entire planet.
Globalization has led to an awareness that international issues, not just domestic ones, matter…”while Yates
(1999) discusses globalization in a dual context of economics and politics, where economic globalization
encompasses changes in production, markets, trade and capital flows, while political globalization refers to a
changing global framework around awareness, processes and political activity.
Whatever the definition or description adopted, there is a clear theme throughout: that globalization has a clear and significant social dimension which encompasses security, cultural identity, social welfare, individual identity, and social cohesiveness. A failure to address these social dimensions impacts directly on wages, poverty, social welfare programs, migration, and cultural integration, and the political consequences for governments are no longer prospective but real.
This paper will discuss the social unrest consequences of globalization and consider whether globalization has
undermined the concept of statesovereignty to such an extent that the social unrest in evidence is in effect the
beginning of a new era in international law and international relations. (Note 1).
2. Sovereignty and Globalization
Writing on the ethics of globalization, Singer (2002) argues that implicit in the term ‘globalization’ is an
understanding that we are moving beyond cooperation between sovereign states, something he calls
‘internationalization’ to a new understanding or conception of what is a nation-state. In the words of the United Nations High Level Panel on Financing for Development (2001) “In the global village, someone else’s poverty very soon becomes one’s own problem: of lack of markets for one’s products, illegal immigration, pollution, contagious disease, insecurity, fanaticism, terrorism…”
Sovereignty as a concept under international law, as with the term globalization, has been various described
(Westaway & Simpson, 2011) but the judgment of Arbitrator Huber in the Island of Palmas(Miangas) Case (1932) is oft quoted: “Sovereignty in the relations between States signifies independence. Independence in regard to a portion of the globe is the right to exercise therein, to the exclusion of any other State, the functions of a State. The development of the national organisation of States during the last few centuries and, as a corollary,the development of international law, have established this principle of the exclusive competence of the State in regard to its own territory in such a way as to make it the point of departure in settling most questions that concern international relationships.”
A critical aspect of sovereignty is that it forms a basic structure of governance which forges a social bond
between citizens and, citizens and the state. This basic structure of governance is expected toprovide the meet the objectives of peace, order, justice, and security within the state, with the sovereign statemanaging itsnational economy to achieve these objectives. As discussed by Devetak&Higgott (1999) sovereign states have the obligation to govern the economy in such a way as to promote the wealth and welfare of the community, ensuring liberty, security and prosperity of the community and ensuring that the specific social needs of the community are met.
Territorial sovereignty, that which defines the physical parameters within which the exclusive right to display the activities of a State are contained, is a still a legal relevancy as it sets identifiable parameters around which
decisions can be made. Indeed, Devetak&Higgott (1999:487) note that the existence and boundaries of justice within a society have been traditionally thought be to be “coextensive with the legal-territorial jurisdiction and economic reach of the sovereign polity.”
Globalization and its impacts have however challenged the exclusive competence of the State to exercise autonomous powers under the umbrella of territorial sovereignty, where the exercise of that exclusive competence directly impacts upon the globalized framework of that State. Further, it is arguable that sovereignty is no longer either practical or adequate as a tool for organizing political life and meeting the social needs of the state, given that states no longer exist in a purely autonomous economic environment, but rather exist in an inter-dependent international community, where it is no longer possible for states merely to choose what international laws they accept or decide with autonomy what they will or will not regulate (Kwakwa, 2000).
Howard-Hassmann (2004) takes this argument further when he argues that while globalization has effectively
diminished the relevance of the individual state, and that what has evolved is a concept of world citizenship,
which encourages the individual to look beyond territorial sovereign borders and to claim rights, freedoms,
choices and opportunities otherwise unknown to them but perceived to be part of the global world in which they live. The consequence can be a growing resentment of the constraints and policies of the State leading to social activism, social unrest and political instability and it is these consequences that this paper will now address.
3. Globalization and Social Unrest
One of the key facilitators of globalization has been liberalization in political, financial and trade markets. Where liberalization occurs, arguably there are qualitative changes in political and economic structures, trends and processes (Yates, 1999), as governments seek to adjust to and benefit from this liberalization and the changes in capital flow which accompany it. Hurtado(1997) suggested that political and social institutions were inadequately prepared to deal with the complex international social relations accompanying globalization and that this in turn gave rise to what he called the “ungovernability phenomena”.
This phenomenon was driven by poverty and other forms of social marginalisation within societies which threatened the rule of law and the authority of the state. This undermining of authority in turn increases violence, corruption and increasing political dissatisfaction and unrest (UN, 2011).
In writing on the relationship between the World Trade Organisation and the global economy, Blackhurst
(1997:531) stated: “To a large extent, governments have only themselves to blame for the backlash. Part of the problem is their frequent lack of candour regarding the fact that even though globalization clearly benefits the country as a whole, some groups in the economy will lose…More important is their reluctance to publicly acknowledge that while globalization creates tremendous opportunities, it also raises the cost of bad policies – such as labour market rigidities, over-regulation, sub-standard schools and educational policies, tax policies that discourage job creation, and chronic budget deficits that reduce investment by reducing national savings.” Built into this backlash against ‘bad policies’ as stated above is the sense that social capital is being undermined.
According to Stiglitz (2003), because a country’s identity is defined by its culture, and because globalization
often brings with it a clash between traditional cultures and new cultures, with the result being that the traditional cultures lose out, and there is a backlash against the new cultural order. To illustrate this, it is useful to briefly discuss the recent demonstrations opposing the introduction of austerity measures in Greece and the background to the introduction of these measures.
3.1 Greece
The news reports and images of violent demonstrations and strikes in Greece in 2011 which shocked the world effectively had their commencement in 2008 with a series of demonstrations and strikes by young people as a response to high unemployment and changes to university education entrance requirements, the increasing high education costs and low post education salaries (Sotiris, 2010). In 2007, there was more than 20% youth unemployment which was one of the highest in Europe. According to Sotiris (2010) this protest movement was triggered by a perception of social inequities and imbalance as well as a failure by public authorities to adequately respond to these concerns.
In 2010, in response to the global financial crisis and the associated world financial crisis, Greece, facing a
national debt of 13% of GDP, was called upon by the International Monetary Fund and the EU to introduce
drastic measures to reign in and reduce national debt. The austerity measures proposed included massive
reductions in wages of government employees, lower pensions and higher retirement age, increased value-added tax as well as increased taxes on alcohol and tobacco, and a significant reduction in military expenses (Renn, Jovanovic&Schröter, 201; OECD, 2011).
This proposed reduction resulted in not only a resumption of demonstrations by the young, but by massive demonstrations by government employees, pensioners, and labour unions, as well as other affected members of the Greek community. According to Renn et al (2011) in 2010 the focus of the organisation lay with the labour unions who claimed that the austerity measures were aimed at the socially disadvantaged and the already poor sections of the community, whilst protected the rich.
In relation to this last point itis important to put these demonstrations and protests into a broader context. Greek political culture has for many years been one of patronage and populism (Pappas, 2010). Over many years, fiscal discipline had all but been abandoned with sharp pay rises in the public sector, the introduction of universal free health care, significant rises in social welfare payments and other benefits, combined with massive tax evasion and a failure of the government tothe state implement effective tax policies. Attempts as far back as 1985 to introduce some austerity measures and freeze wages by the Papandreou government were met with calls by the unions for immediate pay rises or face electoral defeat.
The populist response, despite the obvious need for financial austerity, was to essentially to throw open the financial coffers and declare that people were more important than the state institutions. The only government to attempt to introduce fiscally austere measures was that led by Constantine Mitsotakis who came to power in 1990. His government fell three years later and historically can lay claim to the only government in post-authoritarian Greece not be given a second chance in office.
When one also considers the large-scale political patronage that has been a central part of Greek politics
for decades, and the extensive corruption in the public sector – in 2009 an average of €1,355 per person was paid in bribes for such processes as speeding up obtaining a driver’s licence, getting admitted to public hospitals, or manipulating tax returns (Pappas, 2011) - then the social cultural background to the recent demonstrations is firmly identified. The perception that thenew cultural order which is being forced upon the Greek people through the implementation of austerity measure is unjust fuels the backlash against the order and in turn creates the political unrest and violence which has been evident in Greece.
When one considers Greece’s trading position, it is also evident that the globalization process has not been
positive for Greece. According to the U.S. Department of State’s Background Note on Greece (2011) foreign direct investment inflows to Greece have dropped and continue to be threatened due to declining competitiveness and a high level of red tape and bureaucracy. Further, 79% of Greek GDP is generated through a service economy, which includes tourism, and there is a perennial merchandise trade deficit with 2010 trade imports amounting to $64.5 billion as compared to exports of $22 billion. According to Gissinger and Gleditsch (1999) foreign direct investment and high levels of trade generally lead to higher levels of economic welfare but only where the trade balance is weighted towards exports rather than imports and there is an openness to the international market.
Greece has also relied heavily on its EU trading partners with more than half of Greek trade being intra-EU, and on EU structural funding, and thus has not had the openness to the globalized international market which would seem critical for social equality. An inability to attract and keep foreign investment combined with a significant trade imbalance and insufficient engagement in the international trade market arguably leaves Greece vulnerable to on-going social unrest and instability, underpinned by high unemployment, social inequality, and government instability. The question now to be asked is whether the imposition of austerity
measures and social unrest of themselves undermine sovereignty, and it is to that question that this paper will
now turn.
4. Sovereigntyand Social Unrest
As previously discussed in this paper, sovereignty is the independence of the state to exercise within its territorial boundaries the functions of that state together with the obligation of the state to govern the economy in such a way as to promote the wealth and welfare of the community, ensuring liberty, security and prosperity, and ensuring that the specific social needs of the community are met. However, as this paper has also discussed, globalization has directed impacted upon sovereignty by challenging the competence of the state to exercise autonomous powers where the exercise of those autonomous powers directly impact upon the globalized framework within which that state operates.So what impact does social unrest have upon sovereignty, and does conditionality undermine sovereignty and drive social unrest?
The social unrest which has plagued Greece in recent months has been driven by the imposition of austerity
measures demanded by Eurozone leaders concerned that Greek debt would undermine the stability and value of the euro. However, the imposition of austerity measures in response to debt crises is not a new phenomenon nor is the outbreak of social unrest in response to such imposition. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been imposing austerity type measures on countries under its Structural Adjustment Programs for decades, and there is widespread acknowledgment that there is a link between the imposition of these programs and social unrest in the form of public demonstrations, strikes and violent clashes with police.
The purpose of these programs is to impose ‘conditions’ on the recipient country so as to increase economic viability, by liberalizing trade, expanding privatization and stabilizing the macroeconomic environment, whilst at the same time curbing government expenditure (Stroup &Zissimos, 2011) Essentially, therefore, what is being imposed by these measures, whether by the IMF or the Eurozone in the case of Greece, is change, and the correlation with social unrest is that social unrest is also directed at bringing about change.
Gallano (1994), in his discussion on the Brazilian debt crisis of the 1980’s which saw the IMF institute
significant austerity and debt restructuring measures on Brazil, proposes that whilst the conditions imposed by
the IMF on Brazil could be seen as violating or undermining Brazilian sovereignty by interfering with domestic
politics and the right of the nation state to govern autonomously, the consent of Brazil to the austerity measures legitimized the inference and thus there was no violation of sovereignty, and therefore no violation of international law.
However, can consent to the imposition of rigorous austerity measures be regarded as being freely and validly given by a sovereign state where the consequences of not giving consent effectively economically isolates that state, with the consequences that flow from that isolation? In many of the debates around the Greek crisis and the bailout package deals, there were many calls for Greece to be effectively ‘cut loose’ from the European Union.
In other words, Greece as a sovereign state, albeit part of the European Union, needed to be left to its own
economic future, however dire the consequences of that may be. The decision to ‘bailout’ Greece and the
consequential imposition of austerity measures gave rise to the widespread strikes, demonstrations and violence that were broadcast around the world. It is arguable that Greece consented to intervention when as a sovereign state it ratified the Treaty on European Union and the amending Treaty of Lisbon, (and it is noted, has subsequently agreed to the yet to be finalized Franko-German amendments to the Treaty of Lisbon which would impose automatic sanctions on Eurozone members who fail the new anti-deficit rules to be adopted by members), and entered membership of the Eurozone.
If sovereignty is the basic structure of governance which binds the state and its citizens together, with the
objectives of peace, order, justice and security grounded in a managed national economy (Devetak&Higgott, 1999), then Greece has failed. A sovereign state which fails to provide the governance structure to meet these objectives, and in doing creates a disintegrating society which threatens the inter-dependent international community in which it exists, arguably loses the right to be sovereign, and thus loses the right to the benefits of economic and financial decision making which are ascribed to a sovereign state.
Accordingly, given that a state operates in a globalized framework and we live, as was stated by the United National High Level Panel on Financing for Development in its 2001report, in a ‘global village’ the need forconsent to intervention and the imposition of austerity measures loses its validity, as does the right to the claim sovereignty in economic and financial matters. There is no question that conditionality in the form of austerity measures drives social unrest. There is also no question that social unrest undermines sovereignty, as governments forced by the imposition of austerity measures face electoral backlash and failure, undermining the political framework of the state and raising the risk ratings of that state, which makes global economic and financial engagement more problematic. This in turn undermines any capacity to govern in the manner which would otherwise be expected by the global community.
5. Social Unrest and International Law
Globalization has challenged the scope and role of the state and it is argued, has undermined state sovereignty to the extent that where democratic governance processes fail to generate a sustainable economic and fiscal environment which then directly impacts the external and transnational environment in which that state seeks to operate, then the state loses the sovereign right under international law to govern autonomously. Cerney (1999) refers to globalization as leading to a world which is characterized by a confusion of overlapping governance structures and processes which undermine and delegitimize democratic governance resulting in what he calls a ‘multilayering of authority’ which fragments identities, alienates individuals from the democratic political processes and erodes any notion of public interest.
This fragmentation and alienation it can be argued, is evidenced in the phenomenon of social unrest which,
whilst this paper has discussed Greece, has also been seen in Italy, France, Spain, and even the United Kingdom following the global financial crisis and the need for the introduction of economic and fiscal austerity measures.
This social unrest has taken various forms from riots, strikes and demonstrations, to the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement and it’s offshoots around the world, and there is a grim warning from the International
Labour Organisation that the risk of social unrest is rising due to discontent over the lack of employment
opportunities and the belief that the burden of the crisis is not being shared equally (International
LabourOrganisation, 2011).
Of course, the social unrest which is currently evident in Syria, and that of Egypt, Yemen and Libya may not be obviously directly linked to globalization, but there is still an essence of globalization in this unrest, if only in the context of the tools of social media which have allowed images of the unrest to be broadcast around the world and the calls by the participants for intervention by the global community to secure peace, order, justice and security, which are the expected characteristics of sovereignty, as well as equality and prosperity.
Globalization has created expectations which in turn have created a new social bond extending beyond state borders and essentially removing the monopolization by the state of authority, territory and community (Devetak&Higgott, 1999). This new social bond has created a new world order where the benefits of globalization are seen and desired while the perceived detriments are amplified and rejected, with social unrest the tool being used to achieve these outcomes.The challenge for international law is to meet the challenges of this social unrest within the structure of a new social bond.
Väyrynen (2001) discusses the existence of a transnational society where transnational social spaces exist,
separating social relations from local contexts and restructuring them in a global time-space framework. The
existence of a transnational society with a separate network of power and interaction from that of the individual state provides a challenge as no one government or international organization is able to control effectively many of the aspects of that society.
The tool of social media is an example of this power and interaction, and whilst countries such as China have sought to limit the scope of information being disseminated through social media, the effectiveness and power of social media has been and remains evident and real. It could even be argued that this transnational society is redefining globalization by having the ability to block or hinder progress in
inter-state relationships as well as redefining the values, ethics and issues that drive the key players in the
globalization movement.
International law is no stranger to mass action, and a considerable body of international law has had as its
catalyst significant mass action events (Rajagopal, 2003). The response of international law has been to regulate, for with regulation comes the power to enforce. However, if the power to enforce becomes compromised because the ‘enforcers’ lack either the collective ‘political’ will or are themselves driven not by a need to regulate but by their globalization linkages, then international law as a regulatory tool, fails, as do the organizations established to enforce that law.
Significant criticism has been leveled, for example, at the United Nations for its failure to act decisively in major conflicts around the world, given the responsibility of the United Nations for
collective security (UN, 2004). The United Nations is chartered to “…maintain international peace and
security…”by the use of collective action suppressing acts of aggression or breaches of the peace. However, the power of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to veto resolutions of intervention, effectively diminish the enforcement powers of United Nations, as has been seen recently in the case of Syria where China and Russia exercised this right of veto (Note 2.)
If international organizations such as the United Nations, chartered with the power to enforce international law, fail to act or fail to act quickly and decisively, then the transnational society – the new social bond – will use social unrest and social media to destabilize and force action to be taken. In essence, there is a metamorphosis of a new type of sovereignty, the sovereignty of the transnational society which legitimizes social unrest.
6. Conclusion
Globalization has changed the nature of national and international relationships by creating new and powerful
transnational networks of power and interaction. Sovereignty as a concept has also been changed in this process, and the debate will doubtless continue as to the extent of this change. However, as this paper has discussed, embedded in the right to claim sovereign status is the obligation to provide peace, order, justice and security, and arguably a sound economic and fiscal basis to society.
A sovereign state no longer operates purely autonomously, as globalization has effectively marginalized this ability, and requires the state to consider the broader transnational implications of its policies and actions, as a failure to meet these obligations has transnational or cross border implications.
The consequences of the global financial crisis on international relationships created and driven by globalization have, it would appear, to have been underestimated. The power of social unrest and the creation of a new ‘global village’, a transnational society with new tools, such as social media, and a collective ‘sovereign’ will, have redefined the world in which we live and in doing so, have challenged the scope and parameters of international law.
Whether there is a collective political will strong enough to work towards a new understanding of
international law in a globalized world is yet to be seen, for it will not be easy nor will it necessarily be
welcomed by powerful interests which benefit and profit from the status quo, not by those who fear that they will become even more marginalized in the process. But these are not reasons for not moving towards a new
understanding. The social unrest movement has highlighted that only collectively will the basic goods for a just global village be provided and if this is so, then governance must be exercised at a global level, but this requirements tolerance, transparency, dialogue and commitment. International law and international legal institutions have a key role to play and whilst they may well be ill-equipped at this point to effectively address the demands and consequences of globalization and social unrest, they provide a starting point and at this time, a starting point is better than no point at all.
ISSN 1913-9047 E-ISSN 1913-9055
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education
Globalization, Sovereignty and Social Unrest
Jennifer Westaway1
1 School of Business Law and Taxation, Curtin University, Australia
Abstract
The world has seen over recent months an increase in the level of social unrest in response to both the imposition by governments of austerity measures and attempts by civilians to overthrow undemocratic and repressive regimes. This unprecedented and extensive level of unrest across diverse political and economic environments has raised many questions as to the causes and consequences, not the least of which is the challenge to the sovereignty of the state and the role of globalization.
This paper will discuss the social unrest consequences of globalization and consider whether globalization has undermined the concept of state sovereignty to such an extent that the social unrest in evidence is in effect the beginning of a new era in international law and international relations.
Keywords: globalization, sovereignty, social unrest, international law
1. Introduction
Over recent months, the world has seen an unprecedented level of political and social unrest sweeping through the Arab world and Greece, as well as Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Whilst it may be convenient to see this unrest as a long term consequence of the global financial crisis and its aftermath, it is arguable that this unrest has its foundation in the failure of countries to understand and address the social consequences of globalization.
There are many descriptions and definitions of globalization and the term is used in many different contexts.
Joseph Stiglitz (2002:9) describes globalization as “…the closer integration of the countries and peoples of the world which has been brought about by the enormous reduction of costs of transportation and communication, and the breaking down of artificial barriers to the flows of goods, services, capital, knowledge, and (to a lesser extent)) people across borders.”. According to Sjolander (1996:604) globalization is “...an economic, political, social, and ideological phenomenon which carries with it unanticipated, often contradictory, and polarizing consequences.”
The International Monetary Fund (1997) has defined globalization as “...the rapid integration of
economies worldwide through trade, financial flows, technology spillovers, information networks, and
cross-cultural currents.” Gunter & van der Hoeven (2004) used the term to mean “the gradual integration of
economies and societies driven by new technologies, new economic relationships and the national
and international policies of a wide range of actors, including governments, international organizations, business, labour and civil society.”
Finally, for the purposes of this paper, Seita (1997: 431) encapsulates the varying definitions when he states that globalization “…is a multifaceted concept encompassing a wide range of seemingly disparate processes, activities and conditions…connected together by one common theme: what is geographically meaningful now transcends national boundaries and is expanding to cover the entire planet.
Globalization has led to an awareness that international issues, not just domestic ones, matter…”while Yates
(1999) discusses globalization in a dual context of economics and politics, where economic globalization
encompasses changes in production, markets, trade and capital flows, while political globalization refers to a
changing global framework around awareness, processes and political activity.
Whatever the definition or description adopted, there is a clear theme throughout: that globalization has a clear and significant social dimension which encompasses security, cultural identity, social welfare, individual identity, and social cohesiveness. A failure to address these social dimensions impacts directly on wages, poverty, social welfare programs, migration, and cultural integration, and the political consequences for governments are no longer prospective but real.
This paper will discuss the social unrest consequences of globalization and consider whether globalization has
undermined the concept of statesovereignty to such an extent that the social unrest in evidence is in effect the
beginning of a new era in international law and international relations. (Note 1).
2. Sovereignty and Globalization
Writing on the ethics of globalization, Singer (2002) argues that implicit in the term ‘globalization’ is an
understanding that we are moving beyond cooperation between sovereign states, something he calls
‘internationalization’ to a new understanding or conception of what is a nation-state. In the words of the United Nations High Level Panel on Financing for Development (2001) “In the global village, someone else’s poverty very soon becomes one’s own problem: of lack of markets for one’s products, illegal immigration, pollution, contagious disease, insecurity, fanaticism, terrorism…”
Sovereignty as a concept under international law, as with the term globalization, has been various described
(Westaway & Simpson, 2011) but the judgment of Arbitrator Huber in the Island of Palmas(Miangas) Case (1932) is oft quoted: “Sovereignty in the relations between States signifies independence. Independence in regard to a portion of the globe is the right to exercise therein, to the exclusion of any other State, the functions of a State. The development of the national organisation of States during the last few centuries and, as a corollary,the development of international law, have established this principle of the exclusive competence of the State in regard to its own territory in such a way as to make it the point of departure in settling most questions that concern international relationships.”
A critical aspect of sovereignty is that it forms a basic structure of governance which forges a social bond
between citizens and, citizens and the state. This basic structure of governance is expected toprovide the meet the objectives of peace, order, justice, and security within the state, with the sovereign statemanaging itsnational economy to achieve these objectives. As discussed by Devetak&Higgott (1999) sovereign states have the obligation to govern the economy in such a way as to promote the wealth and welfare of the community, ensuring liberty, security and prosperity of the community and ensuring that the specific social needs of the community are met.
Territorial sovereignty, that which defines the physical parameters within which the exclusive right to display the activities of a State are contained, is a still a legal relevancy as it sets identifiable parameters around which
decisions can be made. Indeed, Devetak&Higgott (1999:487) note that the existence and boundaries of justice within a society have been traditionally thought be to be “coextensive with the legal-territorial jurisdiction and economic reach of the sovereign polity.”
Globalization and its impacts have however challenged the exclusive competence of the State to exercise autonomous powers under the umbrella of territorial sovereignty, where the exercise of that exclusive competence directly impacts upon the globalized framework of that State. Further, it is arguable that sovereignty is no longer either practical or adequate as a tool for organizing political life and meeting the social needs of the state, given that states no longer exist in a purely autonomous economic environment, but rather exist in an inter-dependent international community, where it is no longer possible for states merely to choose what international laws they accept or decide with autonomy what they will or will not regulate (Kwakwa, 2000).
Howard-Hassmann (2004) takes this argument further when he argues that while globalization has effectively
diminished the relevance of the individual state, and that what has evolved is a concept of world citizenship,
which encourages the individual to look beyond territorial sovereign borders and to claim rights, freedoms,
choices and opportunities otherwise unknown to them but perceived to be part of the global world in which they live. The consequence can be a growing resentment of the constraints and policies of the State leading to social activism, social unrest and political instability and it is these consequences that this paper will now address.
3. Globalization and Social Unrest
One of the key facilitators of globalization has been liberalization in political, financial and trade markets. Where liberalization occurs, arguably there are qualitative changes in political and economic structures, trends and processes (Yates, 1999), as governments seek to adjust to and benefit from this liberalization and the changes in capital flow which accompany it. Hurtado(1997) suggested that political and social institutions were inadequately prepared to deal with the complex international social relations accompanying globalization and that this in turn gave rise to what he called the “ungovernability phenomena”.
This phenomenon was driven by poverty and other forms of social marginalisation within societies which threatened the rule of law and the authority of the state. This undermining of authority in turn increases violence, corruption and increasing political dissatisfaction and unrest (UN, 2011).
In writing on the relationship between the World Trade Organisation and the global economy, Blackhurst
(1997:531) stated: “To a large extent, governments have only themselves to blame for the backlash. Part of the problem is their frequent lack of candour regarding the fact that even though globalization clearly benefits the country as a whole, some groups in the economy will lose…More important is their reluctance to publicly acknowledge that while globalization creates tremendous opportunities, it also raises the cost of bad policies – such as labour market rigidities, over-regulation, sub-standard schools and educational policies, tax policies that discourage job creation, and chronic budget deficits that reduce investment by reducing national savings.” Built into this backlash against ‘bad policies’ as stated above is the sense that social capital is being undermined.
According to Stiglitz (2003), because a country’s identity is defined by its culture, and because globalization
often brings with it a clash between traditional cultures and new cultures, with the result being that the traditional cultures lose out, and there is a backlash against the new cultural order. To illustrate this, it is useful to briefly discuss the recent demonstrations opposing the introduction of austerity measures in Greece and the background to the introduction of these measures.
3.1 Greece
The news reports and images of violent demonstrations and strikes in Greece in 2011 which shocked the world effectively had their commencement in 2008 with a series of demonstrations and strikes by young people as a response to high unemployment and changes to university education entrance requirements, the increasing high education costs and low post education salaries (Sotiris, 2010). In 2007, there was more than 20% youth unemployment which was one of the highest in Europe. According to Sotiris (2010) this protest movement was triggered by a perception of social inequities and imbalance as well as a failure by public authorities to adequately respond to these concerns.
In 2010, in response to the global financial crisis and the associated world financial crisis, Greece, facing a
national debt of 13% of GDP, was called upon by the International Monetary Fund and the EU to introduce
drastic measures to reign in and reduce national debt. The austerity measures proposed included massive
reductions in wages of government employees, lower pensions and higher retirement age, increased value-added tax as well as increased taxes on alcohol and tobacco, and a significant reduction in military expenses (Renn, Jovanovic&Schröter, 201; OECD, 2011).
This proposed reduction resulted in not only a resumption of demonstrations by the young, but by massive demonstrations by government employees, pensioners, and labour unions, as well as other affected members of the Greek community. According to Renn et al (2011) in 2010 the focus of the organisation lay with the labour unions who claimed that the austerity measures were aimed at the socially disadvantaged and the already poor sections of the community, whilst protected the rich.
In relation to this last point itis important to put these demonstrations and protests into a broader context. Greek political culture has for many years been one of patronage and populism (Pappas, 2010). Over many years, fiscal discipline had all but been abandoned with sharp pay rises in the public sector, the introduction of universal free health care, significant rises in social welfare payments and other benefits, combined with massive tax evasion and a failure of the government tothe state implement effective tax policies. Attempts as far back as 1985 to introduce some austerity measures and freeze wages by the Papandreou government were met with calls by the unions for immediate pay rises or face electoral defeat.
The populist response, despite the obvious need for financial austerity, was to essentially to throw open the financial coffers and declare that people were more important than the state institutions. The only government to attempt to introduce fiscally austere measures was that led by Constantine Mitsotakis who came to power in 1990. His government fell three years later and historically can lay claim to the only government in post-authoritarian Greece not be given a second chance in office.
When one also considers the large-scale political patronage that has been a central part of Greek politics
for decades, and the extensive corruption in the public sector – in 2009 an average of €1,355 per person was paid in bribes for such processes as speeding up obtaining a driver’s licence, getting admitted to public hospitals, or manipulating tax returns (Pappas, 2011) - then the social cultural background to the recent demonstrations is firmly identified. The perception that thenew cultural order which is being forced upon the Greek people through the implementation of austerity measure is unjust fuels the backlash against the order and in turn creates the political unrest and violence which has been evident in Greece.
When one considers Greece’s trading position, it is also evident that the globalization process has not been
positive for Greece. According to the U.S. Department of State’s Background Note on Greece (2011) foreign direct investment inflows to Greece have dropped and continue to be threatened due to declining competitiveness and a high level of red tape and bureaucracy. Further, 79% of Greek GDP is generated through a service economy, which includes tourism, and there is a perennial merchandise trade deficit with 2010 trade imports amounting to $64.5 billion as compared to exports of $22 billion. According to Gissinger and Gleditsch (1999) foreign direct investment and high levels of trade generally lead to higher levels of economic welfare but only where the trade balance is weighted towards exports rather than imports and there is an openness to the international market.
Greece has also relied heavily on its EU trading partners with more than half of Greek trade being intra-EU, and on EU structural funding, and thus has not had the openness to the globalized international market which would seem critical for social equality. An inability to attract and keep foreign investment combined with a significant trade imbalance and insufficient engagement in the international trade market arguably leaves Greece vulnerable to on-going social unrest and instability, underpinned by high unemployment, social inequality, and government instability. The question now to be asked is whether the imposition of austerity
measures and social unrest of themselves undermine sovereignty, and it is to that question that this paper will
now turn.
4. Sovereigntyand Social Unrest
As previously discussed in this paper, sovereignty is the independence of the state to exercise within its territorial boundaries the functions of that state together with the obligation of the state to govern the economy in such a way as to promote the wealth and welfare of the community, ensuring liberty, security and prosperity, and ensuring that the specific social needs of the community are met. However, as this paper has also discussed, globalization has directed impacted upon sovereignty by challenging the competence of the state to exercise autonomous powers where the exercise of those autonomous powers directly impact upon the globalized framework within which that state operates.So what impact does social unrest have upon sovereignty, and does conditionality undermine sovereignty and drive social unrest?
The social unrest which has plagued Greece in recent months has been driven by the imposition of austerity
measures demanded by Eurozone leaders concerned that Greek debt would undermine the stability and value of the euro. However, the imposition of austerity measures in response to debt crises is not a new phenomenon nor is the outbreak of social unrest in response to such imposition. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been imposing austerity type measures on countries under its Structural Adjustment Programs for decades, and there is widespread acknowledgment that there is a link between the imposition of these programs and social unrest in the form of public demonstrations, strikes and violent clashes with police.
The purpose of these programs is to impose ‘conditions’ on the recipient country so as to increase economic viability, by liberalizing trade, expanding privatization and stabilizing the macroeconomic environment, whilst at the same time curbing government expenditure (Stroup &Zissimos, 2011) Essentially, therefore, what is being imposed by these measures, whether by the IMF or the Eurozone in the case of Greece, is change, and the correlation with social unrest is that social unrest is also directed at bringing about change.
Gallano (1994), in his discussion on the Brazilian debt crisis of the 1980’s which saw the IMF institute
significant austerity and debt restructuring measures on Brazil, proposes that whilst the conditions imposed by
the IMF on Brazil could be seen as violating or undermining Brazilian sovereignty by interfering with domestic
politics and the right of the nation state to govern autonomously, the consent of Brazil to the austerity measures legitimized the inference and thus there was no violation of sovereignty, and therefore no violation of international law.
However, can consent to the imposition of rigorous austerity measures be regarded as being freely and validly given by a sovereign state where the consequences of not giving consent effectively economically isolates that state, with the consequences that flow from that isolation? In many of the debates around the Greek crisis and the bailout package deals, there were many calls for Greece to be effectively ‘cut loose’ from the European Union.
In other words, Greece as a sovereign state, albeit part of the European Union, needed to be left to its own
economic future, however dire the consequences of that may be. The decision to ‘bailout’ Greece and the
consequential imposition of austerity measures gave rise to the widespread strikes, demonstrations and violence that were broadcast around the world. It is arguable that Greece consented to intervention when as a sovereign state it ratified the Treaty on European Union and the amending Treaty of Lisbon, (and it is noted, has subsequently agreed to the yet to be finalized Franko-German amendments to the Treaty of Lisbon which would impose automatic sanctions on Eurozone members who fail the new anti-deficit rules to be adopted by members), and entered membership of the Eurozone.
If sovereignty is the basic structure of governance which binds the state and its citizens together, with the
objectives of peace, order, justice and security grounded in a managed national economy (Devetak&Higgott, 1999), then Greece has failed. A sovereign state which fails to provide the governance structure to meet these objectives, and in doing creates a disintegrating society which threatens the inter-dependent international community in which it exists, arguably loses the right to be sovereign, and thus loses the right to the benefits of economic and financial decision making which are ascribed to a sovereign state.
Accordingly, given that a state operates in a globalized framework and we live, as was stated by the United National High Level Panel on Financing for Development in its 2001report, in a ‘global village’ the need forconsent to intervention and the imposition of austerity measures loses its validity, as does the right to the claim sovereignty in economic and financial matters. There is no question that conditionality in the form of austerity measures drives social unrest. There is also no question that social unrest undermines sovereignty, as governments forced by the imposition of austerity measures face electoral backlash and failure, undermining the political framework of the state and raising the risk ratings of that state, which makes global economic and financial engagement more problematic. This in turn undermines any capacity to govern in the manner which would otherwise be expected by the global community.
5. Social Unrest and International Law
Globalization has challenged the scope and role of the state and it is argued, has undermined state sovereignty to the extent that where democratic governance processes fail to generate a sustainable economic and fiscal environment which then directly impacts the external and transnational environment in which that state seeks to operate, then the state loses the sovereign right under international law to govern autonomously. Cerney (1999) refers to globalization as leading to a world which is characterized by a confusion of overlapping governance structures and processes which undermine and delegitimize democratic governance resulting in what he calls a ‘multilayering of authority’ which fragments identities, alienates individuals from the democratic political processes and erodes any notion of public interest.
This fragmentation and alienation it can be argued, is evidenced in the phenomenon of social unrest which,
whilst this paper has discussed Greece, has also been seen in Italy, France, Spain, and even the United Kingdom following the global financial crisis and the need for the introduction of economic and fiscal austerity measures.
This social unrest has taken various forms from riots, strikes and demonstrations, to the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement and it’s offshoots around the world, and there is a grim warning from the International
Labour Organisation that the risk of social unrest is rising due to discontent over the lack of employment
opportunities and the belief that the burden of the crisis is not being shared equally (International
LabourOrganisation, 2011).
Of course, the social unrest which is currently evident in Syria, and that of Egypt, Yemen and Libya may not be obviously directly linked to globalization, but there is still an essence of globalization in this unrest, if only in the context of the tools of social media which have allowed images of the unrest to be broadcast around the world and the calls by the participants for intervention by the global community to secure peace, order, justice and security, which are the expected characteristics of sovereignty, as well as equality and prosperity.
Globalization has created expectations which in turn have created a new social bond extending beyond state borders and essentially removing the monopolization by the state of authority, territory and community (Devetak&Higgott, 1999). This new social bond has created a new world order where the benefits of globalization are seen and desired while the perceived detriments are amplified and rejected, with social unrest the tool being used to achieve these outcomes.The challenge for international law is to meet the challenges of this social unrest within the structure of a new social bond.
Väyrynen (2001) discusses the existence of a transnational society where transnational social spaces exist,
separating social relations from local contexts and restructuring them in a global time-space framework. The
existence of a transnational society with a separate network of power and interaction from that of the individual state provides a challenge as no one government or international organization is able to control effectively many of the aspects of that society.
The tool of social media is an example of this power and interaction, and whilst countries such as China have sought to limit the scope of information being disseminated through social media, the effectiveness and power of social media has been and remains evident and real. It could even be argued that this transnational society is redefining globalization by having the ability to block or hinder progress in
inter-state relationships as well as redefining the values, ethics and issues that drive the key players in the
globalization movement.
International law is no stranger to mass action, and a considerable body of international law has had as its
catalyst significant mass action events (Rajagopal, 2003). The response of international law has been to regulate, for with regulation comes the power to enforce. However, if the power to enforce becomes compromised because the ‘enforcers’ lack either the collective ‘political’ will or are themselves driven not by a need to regulate but by their globalization linkages, then international law as a regulatory tool, fails, as do the organizations established to enforce that law.
Significant criticism has been leveled, for example, at the United Nations for its failure to act decisively in major conflicts around the world, given the responsibility of the United Nations for
collective security (UN, 2004). The United Nations is chartered to “…maintain international peace and
security…”by the use of collective action suppressing acts of aggression or breaches of the peace. However, the power of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to veto resolutions of intervention, effectively diminish the enforcement powers of United Nations, as has been seen recently in the case of Syria where China and Russia exercised this right of veto (Note 2.)
If international organizations such as the United Nations, chartered with the power to enforce international law, fail to act or fail to act quickly and decisively, then the transnational society – the new social bond – will use social unrest and social media to destabilize and force action to be taken. In essence, there is a metamorphosis of a new type of sovereignty, the sovereignty of the transnational society which legitimizes social unrest.
6. Conclusion
Globalization has changed the nature of national and international relationships by creating new and powerful
transnational networks of power and interaction. Sovereignty as a concept has also been changed in this process, and the debate will doubtless continue as to the extent of this change. However, as this paper has discussed, embedded in the right to claim sovereign status is the obligation to provide peace, order, justice and security, and arguably a sound economic and fiscal basis to society.
A sovereign state no longer operates purely autonomously, as globalization has effectively marginalized this ability, and requires the state to consider the broader transnational implications of its policies and actions, as a failure to meet these obligations has transnational or cross border implications.
The consequences of the global financial crisis on international relationships created and driven by globalization have, it would appear, to have been underestimated. The power of social unrest and the creation of a new ‘global village’, a transnational society with new tools, such as social media, and a collective ‘sovereign’ will, have redefined the world in which we live and in doing so, have challenged the scope and parameters of international law.
Whether there is a collective political will strong enough to work towards a new understanding of
international law in a globalized world is yet to be seen, for it will not be easy nor will it necessarily be
welcomed by powerful interests which benefit and profit from the status quo, not by those who fear that they will become even more marginalized in the process. But these are not reasons for not moving towards a new
understanding. The social unrest movement has highlighted that only collectively will the basic goods for a just global village be provided and if this is so, then governance must be exercised at a global level, but this requirements tolerance, transparency, dialogue and commitment. International law and international legal institutions have a key role to play and whilst they may well be ill-equipped at this point to effectively address the demands and consequences of globalization and social unrest, they provide a starting point and at this time, a starting point is better than no point at all.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)