WARWICK GLOBAL
DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY
News Letter
July – August 2003
“IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SOUTH YOU CAN’T KEEP QUIET ABOUT
THE NORTH” - NELSON MANDELA
Issue 2
IN THIS ISSUE
Your Country and Globalisation
- Introduction by Philip Balker
p. 2
- China by Yuen Li p. 3
- Nigeria by chris Okeke p. 4
- Pakistan by Joudat Ayaz p.5
- Egypt (comments) by Manal
Khalil p. 7
- Germany by Joerg Wiegratz
p. 8
Defining Globalisation – Yet
Again!
- Introduction by Joerg
Wiegratz p. 11
- What is globalisation? The
definitional issue
Resume of Prof. Jan Aart
Scholte’s speech
by Martin Franche p. 12
- Globalisation and food Resume
of Dr Rebecca Earle’s speech by
Nia Williams p. 14
- Production, social
reproduction and globalisation
by Dr. Shirin Rai p. 15
- Mental illness and
development by Chris Underhill
p. 16
- Comments by Nidal Mahmoud
and Sam Dallyn p. 18
International financial crises.
What follows the Washington
Consensus? by Gianluca
Grimalda p. 20
HIV/AIDS and security by
Marian Fawaz p. 22
Re-thinking development
studies : an interview of Richard
Higgott by Joerg Wiegratz p. 23
Globalisation, governance and
Development in practice by
Stephen Grey p. 27
Going and Going …
Despite
the
fact
that
undergraduates were now enjoying their
summer holidays in Ibiza or somewhere
else worshipping the sun, postgraduate
students remained intellectually active
(with one or two drinks breaks!) on a
quieter campus and came along eagerly
to attend what were to be the two final
events of the year for the Warwick Global
Development Society : Your Country and
Globalisation and Defining Globalisation :
Yet Again!. The two events were a brillant
opportunity to further discuss a popular
subject but conceptuality difficult and
controversial. The talks intended to cover
different aspects of globalisation and
development. Our speakers brought in a
diverse range of opinions and expertise
especially for the talk D e f i n i n g
Globalisation : Yet Again! where speakers
came
from
different
academic
backgrounds and from the private sector.
We were particularly honoured to have Mr
Underhill from Basic Needs based in
Leamington who shared insights from his
work in the NGO sector. The society
would like to thank everyone who helped
to make the events possible, especially
the organisers; Joerg Wiegratz, Martin
Franche, Elizabeth Fortin, Dr. Shirin Rai
and Chris Okeke. But most of all, we
would like to express our deepest
appreciation to the speakers without
whom the talks would not have been
possible and, of course, the participants.
Unfortunately, this is the last
issue of the year as most students are
leaving to begin a career or to continue
their studies at the Phd level. However,
do not worry, other issues will come
next September when other motivated
students will take over the running of the
society. On that matter, students who
wish to continue the society’s work are
more then welcome and should make
contact with us or Dr. Shirin Rai
(Shirin.Rai@warwick.ac.uk) for all the
necessary information.
Finally, we are infinitely grateful
to Dr. Shirin Rai for her support and help
since the creation of the society.
This issue is a long one, but
there is something for everyone. Enjoy!
Martin Franche (The Editor)
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 2 of 28
Your Country and Globalisation
Joudat and a general view of the participants
An Introduction by
Philip Baker (MA in IR)
Globalisation has
been a hot topic in
the contemporary
era. Compression
of time and space
has greatly affected
the relationship
between states and
among
communities.
Technological
advancement and
expanding
multinationals’
operation across
the globe have
altered the
conditions for living,
for doing business
and for mediating
politics.
The value of working within a truly
international academic environment was
demonstrated by the Global Development
Society event, "Your Country and
Globalisation." In an event hosted in the
Lakeside common room on the 14th of
July, speakers were invited to give a
personal perspective on the challenges
and opportunities Globalisation represents
for their country. Both the developing and
developed world, small countries and
large, were represented in the wideranging, and frequently vibrant,
discussion. Though certain well-worn
themes dominated the event, like the
continued misunderstandings and
discourse surrounding the term
globalisation, it was impossible not to
learn something new. Such insights range
from a breakdown of domestic investment
management in Nigeria to how beer
commercials apparently define Canadian
cultural identity. Though each country had
its own particular concerns certain
common issues, like the growth of regional
trading blocks and the effects on domestic
businesses of tailoring products to the
world market, could be discerned.
Perhaps the most revealing exchanges
took place between students of classical
economics and those who had taken the
globalisation classes. It was like a public
policy environment in microcosm with
certain economists trotting out the
standard line on topics like international
trade and the rational behind IMF/WTO
led liberalisation. In addition, these
economists displayed an understandable,
though disturbing and gross, ignorance of
the effects globalisation is having on
international politics. For students who
had studied globalisation it was
interesting, and perhaps a little selfgratifying, to have the viewpoints they had
deconstructed all year advanced without
irony. Though in the end a consensus
was still a long way away these
discussions ranked amongst the high
points of the event, at least in terms of
volume.
The event concluded with a
Barbecue and plenty of sangria enjoyed
on the sunny shores of the Lakeside, well,
lake. Though the majority of participants
remained of the same opinion that they
began with, there had been reasoned and
entertaining discourse, which, after all,
was the point!
The following articles are short
resumes from the students’ opinion who
were invited to give a personal perspective
on the impact of Globalisation on their
country.
Only one article from the
developed countries, Germany by Joerg
Wiegratz, was included. Not that the
resumes of Martin Franche and Stephen
Grey that spoke on Canada and the UK
respectively. were not interesting, but
because the main objective of the society
is to increase the awareness on issues
concerning development and developing
countries.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 3 of 28
CHINA
By Yuen Li (MA in GDG)
Among the different dimensions of
globalisation, « Economic globalisation »
is the most influential dimension in the
case of China. Under the influence of
economic integration and the rise of world
production, China has been regarded as
one of the fast-growing economies owing
to its massive resources: cheap labour,
low land rent and other natural materials.
Nowadays, many production houses of
clothing, electronics and other daily goods
are located in China. It is shown in the
statistics that China has roughly
accounted 40% of the total foreign direct
investment (FDI) flow to developing
countries.
Benefited from with the
economic gain and technological
improvement, there is an increase in the
living standards. In terms of education
and health, the government is now
investing more resources, for example,
promotion of the Internet is one of main
directions for building up a knowledge
economy in China. However, under the
economic impacts, there is also an
increasing income gap between classes,
the rich and the poor, the powerful and
powerless, and geographically between
the coastal cities and the inner continental
cities owing to different degree of access
to resources and information, coupled with
uneven distribution of foreign investment
resulting in different levels of
development. In political sense, the
Communist Party in China has recognised
the need for integrating itself into the world
economy, for example, becoming a
member of the Word Trade Organisation,
reforming state-owned enterprises and
offering preferential terms to foreign
investors. Yet, having an absolute power
in the public domain, the Communist party
is still playing an important role in policy
making and administration, thus the
economic and social policies are still
rather conservative and strategic. Also,
public participation is not widely
encouraged. In conclusion, the state is
more willing to respond globalisation in
terms of economic reform but not
necessarily in terms of political reform.
In the case of Hong Kong,
emergence of world market and world
production chain, has changed the exbristish colony in a number of ways,
economically, socially and politically. First
of all, owing to its historical background as
a British colony for more than a hundred
years, Hong Kong has been developed as
a regional business centre in Asia.
Chinese resumption of its sovereignty in
the year 1997 did not change its
favourable commercial environment
following the rationale of ‘one country, two
systems’. The exploration of global trade
and expansion of multinational’s
investment have advanced Hong Kong’s
achievement in import and export plus
services industries such as accounting,
legal services and management
consultation. Currently, Hong Kong is
regarded as the world's freest economy,
the world's busiest container port, a
popular venue for hosting regional
headquarters, the second largest source
of FDI in Asia as well as the second
largest FDI recipient in Asia. However,
facing with a keen competition from other
opening-up economies in Asia, notably
China and other East Asia countries, Hong
Kong is losing its competitiveness in terms
of manufacturing and production due to
high wages and high land rent. Therefore,
many factories have now been shifted to
the
Mainland China to lower the
production cost. In the social dimension,
similar to the case in China, there is a
growing gap between the rice and the
poor, the entrepreneurs are the ones who
can manipulate the opportunities given by
globalisation.
From the cultural
perspective, there is a fusion
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 4 of 28
From the cultural
perspective, there is
a fusion of culture:
symbols of Western
consumerism, from
daily goods to
luxurious items,
brands like Cocacola, Levis and Gucci
are easily found in
Hong Kong.
of culture: symbols of Western
consumerism, from daily goods to
luxurious items, brands like Coca-cola,
Levis and Gucci are easily found in Hong
Kong. Hollyhood movies and foreign
music are common entertainments for the
young generations. On the other hand,
Hong Kong Kung-fu movies have also
opened new markets in the North. Movies
of Jacky Chan, a local Hong Kong action
actor, are becoming more and more
popular in overseas markets. In addition,
the recent health crisis, the SARS
outbreak in Hong Kong is also a good
example to illustrate the global transfer of
disease and global response for
combating the disease via multilateral
institution, the World Health Organisation
and inter-governmental cooperation
created in the global era. Politically
speaking, globalisation has increased the
vulnerability of the economy as well as the
regional financial system. For example, in
l998, HK government injected HK$15
NIGERIA
By Chris Okeke (MA in IR)
The first thing to note about
Nigeria- ‘the giant… with clayish feet’ is its
cultural and ethnic diversity. The country
is made up of more than 250 ethnic
groups but its political, social and
economic life have been dominated by the
three major ethic groups: Hausa, Yoruba
and Ibo. Also, its diversity extends to the
religious sphere; of its 120 million people
about 40% are Muslims, 40% Christians
and 10% African Traditional Religion.
These factors play an important role in the
way Nigeria is being integrated into the
“global village”.
Globalisation is synonym with
integration and can be used explain the
billion into the stock market to defend
stock market and the HK dollar from
attacks by international funds. Under the
advance in communication, satellite and
the Internet, diffusion of democratic norms
has encouraged political participation in
HK. Social movement has now become
more active. For instance, the recent antisubvention law protest in HK has brought
up the attention of overseas media,
progress of which was being reported by
the BBC, the CNN and the foreign
newspapers.
So far, HK has been quite
successful in responding to the challenges
imposed by globalisation, however,
challenges are more than what we have
expected, the recent SARS outbreak and
administrative crisis of the HK government
have showed that there are still lots of
rooms for improvement.
spread of liberal political and economic
values and the consequent social and
welfare implications.
Like mos
developing countries, globalisation has
contributed to the alienation and
marginalization of social groups. In the
case of Nigeria, this process has made
possible for dominant groups to asser
their dominance while subjugating the
minority groups.
In the past four decades, the mos
visible signs of globalisation in Nigeria are
the growth of multinational oil firms and
recently, democracy. Democracy has
ushered in same elite (and dominan
groups) that oppressed and neglected
minority groups. The only difference
between the present politicians and
previous military regimes is the military
uniform. The indifferent attitude of the
politicians to the plight of minority groups
was demonstrated by the Nigerian army’s
‘invasion’ of oil rich village of Odi in 1999
Many lives were lost and an entire village
was razed by troops that were ordered by
politicians.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 5 of 28
Due to the various forms of oil generated
environmental pollution in the local
communities, farming and fishing have
become almost impossible. Consequently,
local people deprived of their livelihood
have migrated to crowded urban areas in
search of jobs. In the pas two years, over
300 people in oil producing areas have
died from explosions from poorly
maintained gas and oil pipelines.
Sam and Cecilia leaning new things
Like the Ogoni case in 1995, the invasion
was to ensure the smooth operation of oil
corporations in the area. In both cases,
the culprits responsible for the violation of
human rights in these oil rich communities
were never brought to justice. This
suggests a possible collusion between the
political elite and oil corporations
The activities of oil corporations in
the Niger Delta (oil producing area) in
Nigeria have adverse effects on the
indigenous culture, livelihood and health.
PAKISTAN
By Joudat Ayaz (MA in IPE)
It might amaze some of you present
here, but most of the people in Pakistan
(including myself) initially welcomed the
forces of globalization. It came with a
promise for a better future for our children
and our children’s children. It is only after
a period of about ten years that its
detrimental affects are now being felt by
the policy makers and the general
population alike.
For the policy makers, the process of
globalization has taken away much of their
discretion
and
independence.
Globalization now carries with it a new
The presence of multinational oil
corporations in the Niger Delta region of
Nigeria has no positive impact on the
communities. The region is one of the
poorest communities in the world despite
the fact that they produce one fifth of the
oil consumed in the world. Clearly, the
main beneficiaries of oil exploration in the
region are political elite and oil
corporations. The spread of liberal
economic and political values in the case
of Nigeria have ensured that minority
groups have been sidelined from the
benefits of globalisation.
development philosophy which greatly
restricts the role of the state in economic
and social activity and imposes a standard
'one size fit all' adjustment policy devised
by the IMF/World Bank. The primary
emphasis of this policy is to achieve
macro-economic stability by reducing
government spending, raising utility
charges and eliminating all subsidies. The
policy makers have to now work within the
dictates of IMF and the World Bank. For
the common man, globalization is
increasing the income disparities between
the haves and have-nots. Between those
who are on the right side of globalization
and between those who are not!
Globalization has been accompanied
by an accentuation of income disparities
with obvious negative implications for the
welfare of large segments of the
population. Pakistan had more equitable
distribution of wealth in 1960, as
compared to the year 2000 although the
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 6 of 28
Page 6 of 28
The decade of 1990s
has produced
income inequalities
in Pakistan which
were never heard of
before in the
country’s history.
Whether it is direct
effect of
Globalization, I am
frankly not sure. But
one thing that is
certain is that the rich
have become richer
and the poor have
become poorer, and
this trend pretty
much continues even
today!
country has had a GDP growth rate of
over 6 % in the decades of 60s and then
again in 80s. Proving thereby that
globalization has in fact increased income
disparities between the general populace.
The decade of 1990s has produced
income inequalities in Pakistan which
were never heard of before in the
country’s history. Whether it is direct
effect of Globalization, I am frankly not
sure. But one thing that is certain is that
the rich have become richer and the poor
have become poorer, and this trend pretty
much continues even today!
The market forces unleashed by
globalization have not helped my country
in its efforts for integration into the world
economy. Integration into global markets
has exacted a very heavy cost, especially
since there are no adequate "safety nets"
for countries faced with economic
difficulties.
In an era of growing globalization,
financial integration and technological
revolution of the 1990s, Pakistan has not
benefited very much. While the world
exports were growing at 5 per cent
annually during the last five years,
Pakistan's exports have remained
stagnant. Foreign direct investment flows
to Pakistan have remained modest in
relation to the size of its economy, despite
liberalization of the economy over 10
years ago, and spurt in information
technology has by passed the shores of
Pakistan so far. On the other hand,
external debt burden has expanded to a
level where it takes up a major chunk of
the budget.
In the decade of 1990s, significant
trade liberalization was accompanied by a
steady decline in the GDP growth rate,
from 6.1% in the 1980s to 4.5% in the
1990s. Similarly, wide-ranging policy
changes and incentives to encourage
foreign investment did not lead to any
significant increase in investment, apart
from larger investment in the private
power sector in the mid-1990s which was
primarily in response to a very attractive
incentive package.
In fact, overall investmen
declined from about 19% of the GDP in
1989-90 to only 15% in 1999-2000. Even
on the export front, the trade performance
has not been satisfactory. Despite
substantial reduction in tariff rates
removal of virtually all non-tariff barriers
and successive devaluations of the
currency (leading to an annua
depreciation of about 10% in the
exchange rate), the growth ! in exports in
the 90s was only 4.5% per annum
compared to 19% in the 70s.
All
the
components
o
globalization do not move in the same
direction. While there is free flow o
information and capital, but labou
movement is restricted. Even in trade
high tech products are traded freely, bu
simple manufactures like textile and
leather goods continue to be protected
and agricultural trade is heavily distorted
by huge subsidies provided by the US
Europe and Japan ($390 billion in the yea
2000). In such an uneven playing field
countries like Pakistan, which are primarily
dependent on agricultural or textile
exports, cannot benefit much from
globalization. In fact, successive
devaluations have! led to progressive
depreciation in export prices and the ne
result has been lower exports.
Another outcome of globalization
has been a huge increase in salaries o
senior managers, accountants, lawyers
and public-relations personnel working fo
MNCs or their local competitors. From a
personal experience, my friends who are
working for MNCs in Pakistan earn five to
six times more than I do working for the
government. For the IT-literate, job
opportunities have been plentiful, and
there are also opportunities to live and
earn abroad. For the English-speaking
upper middle-class, this has come as a
boon. With greater access to disposable
income, the seduction of consumerism
becomes hard to resist, and the demand
for unrestricted globalization inevitably
follows the attraction for new and eve
more advanced consumer goods.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Another aspect of globalization is that
a few select sectors - namely consumer
goods, automobiles, and energy have
Some comments for EGYPT
By Manal Khalil
On the theoretical level
globalization could lead to democratisation
if globalization manages to reduce the
economic gap between the rich and the
poor in one country or another. However,
on the practical level this theoretical
statement does not work. In undemocratic
regimes the globalization process has
deepened violations to political and civil
rights.
Egypt is one of these examples,
the Egyptian government started since
late 1980s until now a process to liberate
the economy, structural adjustment, and
reducing the governmental subsidiaries to
the poor and middle class. Along with this
process the government deepen its control
on the political sphere. Workers, who were
fired from their work due to privatisation,
were not allowed to protest for their rights.
In the 1980s, the government used to use
violence against the workers, hold their
leaders in prisons, and deny them free
trail. In the 1990s, the government took
over the workers syndicate and
attracted most of the foreign investment.
There has been very little investment in
the production of advanced electronics,
computer or telecom hardware, advanced
industrial materials, and capital goods.
These are the areas where Pakistan is
completely dependent on imports and is
likely to fall further behind.
The process of globalization is
asymmetric, with some winners but many
losers. What is needed is a level playing
field for all so that the asymmetry in the
equation can be corrected.
established another one controlled by the
government and headed by an official in
the government. Now we have no
independent syndicate for the workers
who can protest for their rights without
permission from the government. In the
last ten years, workers in Egypt did not get
any permission from the government to
protest. Along with this many NGOs that
used to defend workers rights had been
closed down and banned as a
consequence to a new law in Egypt that
gave the government the right to oversee
he operation of the different NGOs .
Finally, it does not seem from the
Egyptian experience that globalization has
reduced the gap between the rich and the
poor. In the last ten years the conditions of
the Egyptian middle class became worse
than ever. Due to this the rate of the
children dropping out from schools is
incredibly scaring. In fact the gap between
the poor and the rich is increasing every
day.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 7 of 28
One of the effects of globalization in
Pakistan is the development of select
geographical areas and the neglect of
industrially unpopular areas. Industry is
booming in big cities like Karachi, Lahore
and Faisalabad but rural hinterland is
pretty much neglected as far as new
investment is concerned. This has
resulted in rural to urban migration and
has put further pres! sure on civic facilities
in bigger cities.
Page 8 of 28
GERMANY
By Joerg Wiegratz (MA in IPE)
…most forms and
means of economic
and social
governance which
were in practice in
the whole of
Germany (East and
West) over the last
five decades have
somehow been
discredited in the
eyes of significant
parts of the
population
My main thesis is that a specific
triangle of capitalism, social welfare and
liberal democracy in the Western world,
which has allowed some decent economic
development in the post-war decades, is –
for years now - in an obvious crisis in
several countries, one of which is
Germany. With respect to my country this
has led to the interesting socio-political
constellation that the failure/crisis of both
grand systems (central planning and
market economy) have had a
psychological effect on the respective part
of the (now unified) population. In present
times, this is an unparalleled situation for
the governance of a national territory
worldwide, in my opinion, regarding the
combination of narrative and belief
structures (ideological aspects), the
resulting effects for the political culture
and the like. One could therefore say that
most forms and means of economic and
social governance which were in practice
in the whole of Germany (East and West)
over the last five decades have somehow
been discredited in the eyes of significant
Nidal trying to make a point at the BBQ
parts of the population: be it either the
‘socialist idea/reality’ due to the system’s
breakdown, or the pattern of the German
social-democratic/neo-liberal welfare state
due to, for instance, the current financial
crisis of the social net and the high rate of
unemployment. In this context it is
furthermore worth noticing that in the
current global era, our politicians and their
constituencies can indeed turn their heads
and look for seemingly better policy
solutions elsewhere on the globe; and yet
they seemingly find nothing. Or at the very
least, after having looked around for so
long (and doing nothing fundamental), the
respective ‘success stories’ abroad have
already entered into a crisis stage as well,
e.g. the famous Dutch ‘compromisemodel’ or the US model (IT) of the 1990s.
Hence, even the ‘success stories’ loose
their attractiveness for ‘bench-marking’
and further attempts at matching those
examples. Germans, ultimately, are left
with awkward and unresolved questions in
the ‘new’ world of policymaking.
Current policy dilemmas and the
efforts to deal with them in political
practice, through daily back-and-forthpolicy making (e.g., tax policy) from
generally seemingly ‘helpless’ politicians,
further undermine the thrust and belief of
the governed in the sustainability and
fundamental pillars of the chosen model.
All this, I would suggest, has led to a crisis
of political mentality in the public (political
communication, definition and selfunderstanding of the public body) as well
as in the private sphere. The current
condition seems to be a widespread
confusion (or public denial) regarding the
reasons of certain crises phenomena (and
their possible resolution) and an insecurity
regarding, for instance, the individual and
collective future. Consequently, we
observe a perceived as well as real crisis
of governance and expertise wherein
traditional means of economic/social
governance are deemed ineffective.
Finally, I would suggest that globalisation
(ignoring the positive aspects of it for the
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 9 of 28
the sake of a clear argument in this article)
and its consequences for industrial
countries like Germany contradicts with
and undermines the main pillars of the
German narrative (i.e. fundamental
assumptions of both the respective parties
and their constituencies, e.g. the Rhein
capitalism/corporatist model).
I can only shortly describe the
‘German Dream’: whereas in the US, the
state has just to ensure the structure
through which everybody can (or has to)
pursue his/her happiness, the ‘German
Dream’ traditionally means that the state
has to make sure that everybody actually
finds his/her happiness. This has deep
consequences for the conduct of policy
(which I cannot analyze thoroughly here).
Obviously though, this concept does come
under threat from some of the effects of
globalisation. Other related aspects of the
German narrative currently under threat
include: the constitutional policy goal of
the equality of life standards in the federal
states, the notion of ‘wealth for everybody’
which was a slogan invented in and for the
post-war era but is still an important
(hidden) pillar of the rhetoric, social
responsibility of corporations, the notion of
a social market economy, and the idea of
solidarity and a spirit of shared interests
as a national family (corporatism).
The point I am attempting to make
here is that with globalisation (the new
stage of the international division of
labour), the gap between the (static,
traditional) national narrative, and the
(dynamic)
real
conditions
(outcomes/results) seems to be
increasing. In the last decade or so we
have already witnessed a significant
fragmentation of individual chances in the
working place (e.g. unskilled workers
asymmetrically disadvantaged/Fourth
World in the First World, new social
exclusions/new social geography of
globalisation [see Robinson 2002]). As
such, we have observed widespread
disappointment and disillusion, new social
(policy) experiments, a crisis of the union
model, and finally a change of the notion
of social justice (big traditional companies
often don’t pay taxes anymore etc.). An
illustrative example for this rift was the
current discussion to allow people, who
illegally brought their money abroad in the
past (to avoid tax payment), to legally
transfer their money back to Germany and
just pay some taxes (without further legal
consequences). The heavily indebted
state has hoped to gain tax revenues and
to increase the amount of available private
money for new investment in Germany.
However, the rhetoric (the policy idea: to
defeat legal/moral issues with the
economic argument) had, I believe,
fundamental negative moral effects for the
narrative structure of the general
population as I described it above. There
seem to be many paradoxes (of the socialdemocratic/neo-liberal model) like this in
current times. To give another example:
on the one hand there is the notion of the
strive for individual success, not only but
especially for the educational elites, which
contains to motivate people to go abroad
for study or for work (‘use your resources
in the best way!’); on the other hand
Germany suffers from exactly this brain
drain of their young elites. The result is a
paradoxical discourse of pursuing the
elites (e.g. German researchers in the US)
to come back (‘serve your country!’).
Globalisation reveals such inherent flaws
of the orthodox rhetoric.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 10 of 28
Regarding the restructuring project in the
East one can conclude, that (in a
globalising world) even huge amounts of
money (in the first ten years after the
reunification public investment and state
subsidies for business and the like
amounted to around half a trillion Euro)
does not ensure that long-term (industrial)
development can be accomplished (e.g. in
the heartland of the North). Today, the
average unemployment rate in the East is
about 20 percent (hundreds of thousands
work in West Germany) and resignation as
well as a psychological escapism are
widespread in certain areas. Furthermore,
according to public polls, democracy and
markets as concepts have surprisingly
little acceptance among East-Germans. A
further point worth mention is that even
the icons of industrial development (not
only) in the East (like the modernised
shipbuilding industry in the north-eastern
region where I come from) symbolise both
at the same time the success of the
present as well as the possibility for future
economic crisis and instability in the
region. In a globalising and fast changing
international economy, communities /
regions can enjoy their economic success
(investment attraction) only temporarily
while having to deal with the very notion of
threat and insecurity (due to the
competition with the cheaper shipbuilding
industry of South Korea in my example)
almost simultaneously as they celebrate
the recent fruits of (expensive)
modernisation and restructuring.
I would further like to mention the
phenomena of a divided public awareness
of global market competition which might
be a common feature in countries similar
to Germany which have very large public
and export sectors. Whereas blue- and
white-collar workers in the export
industries are very familiar with global
forces, those who work for the state (with
their often life-long employment contracts)
are rather resistant to acknowledge the
changing parameters. It seems to me that
this creates very different mentalities
among the population when it comes to
discussions about reforms and the like.
This certainly increases the complexity of
mentality strata with which policy analysts
and politicians are confronted when they
pursue their majorities.
Some final points to conclude.
Germany is – as in some other aspects of
our history – a latecomer when it concerns
a mature discussion about globalisation.
Until 1989 the Cold War-discourse was
dominant – this was followed by the
unification-discourse. Only around 1998
with the election of the social-democrat
Gerhard Schroeder as chancellor and the
following Blair-Schroeder paper (Third
Way) did Germany start to recognizably
participate in the globalisation discourse
on the international stage. Yet, genuine
(so-called anti-) globalisation movements
only emerged with the spread of Attac
which just recently tried to combine its
forces with traditional single issue social
movements (Greens, anti-atom, Peace).
And yet, while the country further
globalises internally (bi-national
marriages, migration) there is still a long
way to go for the nation until a truly new
identity which entails a conceptual
consideration of globalisation and its
effects (or migration/openness) begins to
emerge. For the moment, there is a rather
under-theorised consent among the
leading parties about how to respond to
the globalisation challenge. Sustainable
policy concepts¸ if at all, only arise slowly.
Economically and socially costly and
painful ‘trial and error moves’ as well as a
pathological learning seems to be the
chosen way (strategy), even in a
seemingly sophisticated policy community
such as Germany.
The participants at the BBQ
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
AN INTRODUCTION
By Joerg Wiegratz (MA in IPE)
One of the core intentions for this
symposium
was
to
offer
an
interdisciplinary programme and therefore
to enjoy once again the intellectual
richness of the University of Warwick and
its neighbour communities. We believe,
as many others before us, that this
interdisciplinary experiment is a promising
approach, especially for social science
students. Some parts of the promise had
been delivered by the talk of both the
audience and the speakers, others had
not.
Yet, I think, the symposium was
an opportunity, at least, to train our crossthinking and cross-acknowledging
capacities. Furthermore, every student
had the chance to truly experience the
difficulties, or to be more positive here: the
pre-conditions, for such cross-border
exchange and learning. In this respect the
lesson from the exercise has been
obvious from my point of view. To make
the most of it, students have to show and
further develop a great(er) skill of empathy
and sensitivity for each speaker, or to be
more precise, for the main analytical
approaches, language preferences and
principle concerns of the respective
departmental view. We have to be able
to grasp the core analytical tools and the
very core interest of each presentation.
Moreover, students ideally should be able
to generalise from the respective theme
what they can transfer to the main agenda
of their own studies. Every speaker, for
example, can give us insights regarding
different and new elements of analysis
and therefore expand the « pool » from
which we can generate future research
questions. For all this, it matters crucially
that we have the capability to transfer and
translate knowledge. To be able to do
this, we have to be aware first of all of the
models, flaws, holes and open questions
of our own study field. Moreover, we have
to be willing to commit ourselves to the
extra effort of cross-disciplinary thinking
and to sacrifice our « comfort zones ».
What is necessary here is that we can
generalise our own view so that we
prepare our knowledge to go over the
bridge, or at least to meet halfway. If our
communicative partner would do the
same, we could truly merge and combine
the insights and results from the
respective « river side ». This would help,
I believe, to overcome an overspecialised
way of thinking, which unfortunately
excludes the rich toolbox of the very
neighbour department.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 11 of 28
Defining Globalisation: Yet Again! – The Symposium
Page 12 of 28
What disturbs
political scientists
when they read
economics paper?
What would they
suggest is a feasible
way for economists
to start putting more
P[olitics] into their
studies?
Eventually, interdisciplinary experiments
have the positive effect to put our own
core assumptions and insights, which we
believe are so well-founded, into broader
perspectives, and hence, necessarily, to
relativise them: It’s not just the politics
students who work on globalisation. With
our own research, in the best case, we
most of the times just add a little piece to a
better understanding of a phenomena like
globalisation.
To conclude, I can just politely ask the
scholars to try to prepare their language
for such interdisciplinary experiments and
to address and signal more clearly what
they think is worth discussing/considering
at this broader table (e.i. what they
suggest should be taken into
consideration on the intellectual « firecamps » on the other river-side). This
includes a well-founded critique, I would
believe, of the holes of the paradigms and
views of the others. For example, what
disturbs political scientists when they read
economics paper? What would they
suggest is a feasible way for economists
to start putting more P[olitics] into their
studies? The result of such an exercise
can be mind-provoking for all of us.
Actually, it can and should be mindshocking, with all of its consequences. At
least, the latter was my own experience
when I listened, as an undergrad
economist student some years ago, for the
first time to a lecture given by a sociology
professor. For me, the cross-boarder
exchange and learning seems worth the
effort, for both students and academics.
However, I’m also aware of the (short- and
long-run) impediments, arising from the
sociology and politics of academia, for any
kind of interdisciplinary invitational effort.
Yet, if I would be around next year I would
very much like to see different department
representatives
discussing
their
understanding of for instance: principles of
a just economy, the understanding of
markets, or, conceptualising of society.
That could be promising! Let’s give it a try
at least!.
WHAT IS GLOBALISATION? THE DEFINITIONAL ISSUE
Prof. Jan Aart Scholte (CSRG)
Resume by Martin Franche (MA in IPE)
The most common returning pattern in
the globalisation debate is the
disagreement over the nature and
significance of the phenomenon, its
definition. What is globalisation? Like any
other concept in social science, like power
and state, globalisation is highly contested
among scholars even with the simplest
elements. The debate is intense and
persistent. The multiplication of definitions
and the missleading use of the word can
easily be a source of extreme confusion
for unexperience students and the general
public. One should not be surprise to read
in the relavant literature that globalisation
does not exist. Unfortunately, there is no
way to avoid the definitional impasse, to
explain what globalisation does you need
to say what it is.
Prof. Jan Aart Scholte has addressed
a unique definition at the symposium that
is clearly presented in his working paper
What is Globalisation? The Definitional
Issue – Again. He defines globalisation as
“ the transplanetary connections between
people”.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 13 of 28
Prof. Jan Aart Scholte.
Globalisation represents for Scholte is
distinct social space were people all
around the world engage with each other.
It is a single place, “a special unit itself”
with its “own right”. In is own words, “talk
of the global indicates that people may live
together not only in local, provincial,
national and regional realms, as well as
built environments, but also in
transplanetary spaces where the world is
a single place”. Than, the globalisation
process is the spread of social relations in
this distinct social space. “Spaciality” or
“social space” where social life occurs is
the key element of Scholte’s definition and
conceptualisation. Scholte explains that
globalisation
as
“transplanetary
connections between people” avoid the
common analytical dead end of other
definitions like globalisation as
internationalisation, liberalisation,
universalisation and westernisation.
However, using Scholte’s definition,
what is actually different from other
periods of globalisation in history? We all
feel that there is something novel, a new
era, a process affecting the lives of human
beings across the entire planet, embracing
transformative processes at every level of
society. Scholte makes the distinction that
the new globalisation era is better
characterised by “supraterritoriality” social
relations, i.e. that “transcend territorial
geography”. Social relations are now
more de-linked from traditional territorial
boundaries. They now take place more
simultaneity and instantaneity to territorial
space.
Put in other words, the
contemporary globalisation implies a timespace compression process which
involves social relations beyond territorial
space.
Considering the massive literature on
the subject, should we considered Prof.
Scholte’s definition a way forward or
simply another definition among others?
Students who had the occasion to seat on
Dr Shirin Rai ‘s GDG seminars know more
than well that the answer is quite
debatable. The comments of Sam Dallyn
in his article below is an example.
However, it is clear that Scholte’s
definition is a satisfactory attempt to make
sense out of this globalisation mess. Not
many authors have taken the time the to
developed a definition that avoids the
multiplication of social dimensions, i.e. a
definition that uses globalisation to explain
everything phenomenon on the planet.
Scholte clearly cuts the reality and
precisely points the subject that needs to
be observed.
We are now told to “Think BIG”, to
think globally. As Scholte suggests, a new
methodology should be constructed to
face the challenge. This methodology
should not be based on tradtional ones
but on a vast multidisciplinary experience
and new ideas
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 14 of 28
GLOBALISATION AND FOOD
Dr. Rebecca Earle (History Department)
Resume by Nia Williams (MA in GDG)
It was with great pleasure that the
society welcomed Dr Rebecca Earle from
the history department, to present a paper
on Globalisation and Food.
manufacturing and production during the
industrial revolution,
leading to the
expansion of Europe, then to colonialism,
and as Earle argues, ultimately to the
process of globalisation as we recognise
it.
We are all of us familiar with the
contemporary aspects of the globalisation
and food debate. We have deliberated the
pros and cons of crop specialisation,
criticised the pressure on developing
countries to sell foodstuffs for export,
despite domestic scarcity, and scrutinised
the structures of power that underlie global
corporations such as McDonalds. It was
therefore refreshing to focus on the
historical question of what made possible
the advent of global foods. It was posited
that a process referred to as the
Colombian Exchange constituted a
revolution in global eating habits.
The Colombian Exchange was a
term used to connote the two-way flow of
living things developed in the wake of
Columbus’ arrival in the Americas. It was a
process of diffusion of disease, plants,
animals and peoples that had been
impossible until these two isolated worlds
met. Earle argued that in terms of edible
foodstuff, the exchange revolutionised
world diets. The example of chicken tikka
masala and a side of Bombay potatoes,
now a staple British dish, was given in
order to illustrate this point. Without the
vital ingredients of tomatoes, chile and
potatoes, all of which originate from MesoAmerica this everyday dish and many
others, would not be part of our diet.
Moreover once in Europe these foods
quickly travelled to India, amongst other
places, where they have also become
incorporated into local cuisine.
More importantly perhaps is how
staples such as the potato, sweet corn,
manioc and sweet potato led to a growth
in world population. Pursuing this point
further it could be argued that better diets
had a direct impact on peoples capacity to
work. This may have facilitated
Dr. Rebecca Earle
The historical perspective
presented by Dr Earle was refreshing and
thought-provoking. As politics students it is
often all to easy to overlook events and
debates occurring outside the discipline,
but this talk, although not immediately
connected with our class discussions of
globalisation, posed some interesting
questions. For instance Dr Earle’s
perspective seem to conflict with the
definition of globalisation presented by
Professor Scholte. In tracing the historical
trajectory of globalisation it appears that
for Earle the phenomenon is nothing new,
rather it is a process of change that has
been underway for centuries. This
appears in direct opposition to Scholte’s
definition of globalisation as supraterritoriality. In defining globalisation, yet
again, we are left with the feeling that
such a process defies simple
categorisation. Nevertheless, the past
year has hopefully allowed us to hone our
particular understanding of what will
remain an essentially contested concept.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 15 of 28
PRODUCTION, SOCIAL REPRODUCTION AND GLOBALISATION
Dr. Shirin Rai (PAIS)
Globalisation is a distinctive
expansion of capitalist relations of
production, which requires a restructuring
of the role of the national state, and of
international relations, political vocabulary,
institutions of governance as well as the
idea of the community. Capitalism is not
simply an economic framework, but
fundamentally a set of social relations,
which is reflected in and structures the
way we produce and exchange goods and
services as well ideas and ideologies. I
suggest that gender relations are
constituted by and are constitutive of the
global political economy.
Feminist scholars figure hardly at
all in the traditional international relations
and IPE accounts of globalisation - other
than at time as objects of policy outcomes,
or victims of such outcomes. Under
globalisation, women are a fundamental
part of the way in which capital is seeking
to lower the costs of production through
what is called the new international
division of labour, where manufacturing,
especially in labour intensive sectors, is
being now concentrated in the South.
Dr. Shirin Rai
They are also a fundamental part of the
restructuring of the role of the state that is
going hand in hand with this – through
structural adjustment policies in the South
and a 'reassessment' of the state's role as
a guarantor of welfare in the North.
Women are picking up the tab for higher
male unemployment on the one hand, and
lower levels of state provision on the
other. Feminist economists are worried
that this increasing burden will have a
detrimental effect on gender relations and
on the lives of women and men.
Gendered political economy (GPE) calls
for a paradigmatic shift to include gender
in conceptualising the reconfiguration of
the 'new geography of power'. It suggests
that the current transformation of the
global economy corresponds to important
changes in the governance frameworks of
production and social reproduction on a
global scale. It insists that IPE must
include an analysis of the contribution of
social reproduction which refers to the
ongoing reproduction of labour power and
the social processes and human relations
associated with creating and maintaining
the social order.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 16 of 28
MENTAL ILLNESS AND DEVELOPMENT
Chris Underhill, Director of BasicNeeds
(NGO in Lemington Spa)
Describing the Need
Mental illnesses are a disorder of
the mental process that often results in a
diminished capacity for coping with the
ordinary demands of life. These disorders
are treatable. Research shows mental
disorders affect around 15% of the world's
population - rising to 40% when stressrelated disorders are included.
The scale of the global challenge
posed by mental illness has become
increasingly clear in recent years
(Desjarlais R, Eisenberg L, Good B,
Kleinman A. 1995). Mental illness now
accounts for about 12.3% of the global
burden of disease (WHO), and this will
rise to 15% by the year 2020 (Murray CJL,
Lopez AD,1996), by which time
“depression will disable more people than
AIDS, heart disease, traffic accidents and
wars combined” (Bill Wilkersen). The
economic impact of mental ill health is
phenomenal, as it is on the lives of huge
numbers of individuals, their families and
communities. While this enormous health
burden is increasingly being recognised,
so too is the inadequacy of our global
response.
The WHO has just published the
first global profile of mental health services
and it clearly shows that mental illness, in
most countries of the world, is simply not
taken seriously.
Forty per cent of
countries have no mental health policies
and 25% have no legislation in the field of
mental health. As one might expect,
services also show huge international
variations with one third of people (33
countries with a combined population of
two billion) living in nations that invest less
than 1% of their total health budget in
mental health (WHO). In general, lower
income countries invest proportionately
less in mental health, and this is especially
Mr. Chris Underhill
the case in Africa and South Asia.
Community care facilities have yet to be
developed in about half of the countries in
the African and South Asia Regions. The
availability of mental health professionals
in large areas of the world is extremely
poor. More than 680 million people, the
majority of whom are in Africa and South
Asia, have access to less than one
psychiatrist per million of population.
BasicNeeds’ confirms this
research through its growing programme
experience, notably the tremendous
limitations in trained personnel and
facilities. In Northern Ghana, Lance
Montia, Programme Manager, noted in his
pre-baseline study that there were 9
retired and 6 practising psychiatrists in
Ghana, none of whom were in the
BasicNeeds programme area of Northern
Ghana. Our Associate Representative in
Tanzania, Mary Ann Coates, reports that
this country spends 4.8% of GDP on
health but notes that the percentage
allocated to mental health is undeclared
(WHO). There are currently only 11
qualified psychiatrists in Tanzania. None
are based in the Southern Zone, the
proposed site of our work.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
A model for mental health and development
1.
Community Mental Health: Mechanisms developed for easy access of mental health
services by the mentally ill people in the community.
2.
Capacity building: Supporting mentally ill people and their carers to actively participate
in consultation workshops and self-help groups; institutional strengthening of community
based partner organisations on a range of aspects that are required for the
sustainability of the programme.
3.
Promoting sustainable livelihoods: Skill development and linking support services
(finance & business development services) to help mentally ill people and their carers in
improving family income. Here the programme identifies the capabilities of individuals
and those around them who want to be associated with the project, along with suitable
trades within the community that can be merged into a micro enterprise.
4.
Research & advocacy: With the involvement of all the stakeholders, understanding the
context within which the programme operates, so as to build an information base to
represent the “voice of mentally ill people”. In order to place the voice of the mentally ill
person at the centre of the narrative , a series of life stories as told by the people
themselves, have been developed. They will contribute to the collective body of
knowledge and will be published with consent at appropriate times.
The data
generated by our research creates the basis for ‘user-led and evidence-based’
advocacy at local, national and international levels.
5.
Programme management and administration: Administering the programme with the
active participation of the partner organisations, covering planning, implementation and
monitoring aspects.
For information on this topic contact Chris Underhill
Tel: 00 44 (0) 1926 330101
Email: chris.underhill@basicneeds.org.uk
Web: http://www.basicneeds.org.uk
Web: http://www.mentalhealthanddevelopment.org
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 17 of 28
A very striking aspect of global
mental health is the extent to which the
state is often the only player in the
institutional landscape. In countries where
the voluntary sector has a proud and
plentiful tradition, such as India, with a few
notable exceptions the presence of nongovernmental organisations (NGO’s) is
really quite extraordinarily slight.
Significantly, in talking to mentally ill
people in our current programmes we
have found that they were almost never
part of community based rehabilitation
schemes, development programmes or
income generation projects
Page 18 of 28
Globalisation and the Social Sciences :
A Lack of Communication!
Comments By Nidal Mahmoud (MA in IPE)
Intending to showcase the best
from various fields of academia and
practical efforts under the common and
'integrated' force of globalization, the
Symposium unfortunately failed to deliver
the most basic denominator of what was
expected.
The speakers, all accomplished
and respected professionals, appeared to
have lost touch with the spirit of this
interdisciplinary discussion wherein
genuine communication could have been
possible if only because it resided under
the multidimensional umbrella that is
globalization. Yet, instead of some sense
of synergy (though fleeting indirect
comments were made), each presenter
chose to sell his/her research, at times
only marginally related to the process, at
other times completely irrelevant - an
unnerving experience after two hours.
I wish I could blame the
organizers for its under-performance, but I
cannot. Such a lack of communication is
unfortunately the norm amongst
specialists, where it is either a lack of
interest or some form of fear which inhibits
them from broadening the scope of their
arguments. Ladies and gentlemen,
welcome to the era of globalization, where
the marvels of communication are blasted
through countless channels, and yet
between the learned and aware, it is eerily
non-existent.
All is not lost however, and the
simple exercise of sensitivity and further
research for the participation in any
interdisciplinary debate is easily feasible.
History, politics, economics, as well as
psychology are all interdependent and
potentially communicable studies, it is our
duty to simply seek out those connections
not only because we technically can in this
knowledge-enhancing globalizing world,
but because we owe it to the informational
projects - always building, always
progressing - of our past, this present, and
their future.
Globalisation Defined (?)
Comments by Sam Dallyn (MA in IPE)
In attempting to draw an interest
towards the discussion on the 16th July:
Globalisation: The Definitional Problem
Again, I brought up the subject amongst
some friends. The general response from
them, who admittedly were largely from an
activist rather than an academic political
background, was « globalisation isn’t that
one of those theoretical terms which is
now so widespread that it can apply to
anything and is of no use anymore? » To
be honest the response surprised me
slightly but as I reflected on it I have to say
I can see why the concept causes such
confusion. I have to admit sniggering
slightly myself when I saw a reference in a
paper to, wait for it… post-globalisation
(Helleiner 1996). My reply incidentally, in
the protracted discussion that followed the
question, was that although that had
happened to other theoretical terms once
in fashion like post-modernism there was
some use to the concept of globalisation.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 19 of 28
The parallels between the terms
postmodernism and globalisation are
actually quite interesting. Many people, of
course, characterise globalisation as
postmodern. I have to confess myself to
being a member of the club that sees the
term « postmodern » to now be so
widespread as to be theoretically useless.
Any term that can supposedly characterise
Blade Runner, Barnett Newmann, Jean
Baudrillard, Big Brother and advanced
Western capitalism must of in some way
outstayed its welcome. So I suppose I
came to the talk on Wednesday asking
what prevents the concept of globalisation
from befalling the same fate?
Its extremely difficult to explain all
of the presentations involved in the
discussion about globalisation in an article
this size. As a range of different subjects
and discourses, at times conflicting
discourses were connected to the
phenomenon of globalisation. These
included the globalisation of food, of the
liberalisation of Eastern European
economies, of feminism and of an NGO
involved in mental health. In this context
then I’ll focus simply on Scholte’s
presentation because in a sense it served
as a summary for many of the discussions
that followed in more specific fields. He
has also assumed an important place in
debates about globalisation in trying to
provide the concept with the necessary
definitional clarity it requires, that was
noted above. I find Scholte’s definition
useful because it has the necessary
modesty to recognise the partiality of
‘izations’ as constant processes rather
than products, yet it also provides much
needed definitional clarity.
Im sure your all aware of the
Scholte position in “Globalisation A Critical
Introduction” and CSGR working papers in
which very roughly globalisation refers to
“supraterritoriality”, a change in the
configuration of spatial relations and very
loosely, to some extent inaccurately, it
refers to a complex form of
deterritorialisation. We must then of
course strike some of the cautionary notes
Scholte does, that globalisation exists with
counter tendencies of re-territorialisation,
that it is not something which is by any
means literally global. That globalisation
only applies for some sections of the world
population given that the vast majority
does not have access to transnational
communications.
From an activist
standpoint there is certainly a sense both
within the mainstream and the academic
margins of what is wrongly termed the
anti-globalisation movement that people
increasingly do not see an emphasis upon
globality as something intrinsically good or
bad. This is a feature of course of what
Scholte argues. Look for example at
global social movements or what are
termed high profile anti-globalisation
thinkers like Monbiot and Klein do not
characterise themselves as antiglobalisation theorists. My only concern
with the position Scholte presents, which I
see as extremely useful, is that the final
cautionary note he offers about
globalisation ought to be the primary
question of the new global order. That
access to the means of the phenomenon
of
globality,
like
transnational
communications, are only available to a
tiny minority of the world’s population. The
globally disenfranchised ought to assume
the central place in any analysis of
globalisation and one can question in what
sense it is actually a reality for them.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 20 of 28
International Financial Crises: What Follows the
Washington Consensus?
By Dr. Gianluca Grimalda (Research Fellow, Centre
for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation)
The
original
Washington
consensus agenda, which was outlined by
John Williamson in 1989, was a
comprehensive package of fiscal,
structural, and monetary reforms that,
according to the views held ‘in
Washington’ , Latin American countries
would have needed to embrace in order to
tackle the already daunting problem of
their public debt. The three basic ideas
stressed by Williamson were, simply put,
macroeconomic discipline, market
economy, and openness to the world (at
least in respect of trade and FDI) . These
ideas became so popular, both in the
political agenda of policy-makers, and as a
target of the no-global discontents as the
quintessential neoliberal view, that is was
inevitable that the Washington Consensus
was heavily questioned when the dramatic
sequence of financial crises hit developing
countries during the 90s.
The 2003 Conference of the
Centre for the Study of Globalisation and
Regionalisation (CSGR) , which was held
at the University of Warwick in mid-July,
focussed on these themes, attempting to
take stock of recent experiences and
sketching out the bases for a ‘PostWashington Consensus’ view. The scars
of such episodes of Financial Crises were
still so vivid that it was inevitable that
much of the attention of the speakers was
drawn to how to prevent and resolve such
crises. However, as many commentators
noted, this pair of objectives, per se,
already points to an intrinsic problem in
the nature of IMF interventions. In fact,
prevention requires the IMF to stand by a
country and promise its liquidity to help
solve the possible inefficiencies of capital
markets; in the words of Professor Portes
(London Business School), the IMF should
be a ‘lender of first resort’, rather than one
of last resort. On the other hand,
resolution cannot systematically imply the
big rescue operations that were put in
place, for instance, in the case of Mexico
and, with quite an opposite result, for
Argentina. Not only is this financially
unfeasible for the IMF itself, but it will
prompt ‘irresponsible’ and ‘risky’ behaviour
in both policy-makers and creditors,
something that is generally referred to as
the moral hazard problem. But once the
IMF has accepted to endorse a scheme of
assistance to a country, i.e. it wants to
prevent a crisis, its threat to withdraw from
such a scheme in order to avoid moral
hazard may become non-credible in the
imminence or occurrence of a crisis, thus
hampering the possibility of an orderly
resolution. In the words of Professor
Powell (Universidad Torquato di Tella,
Argentina), this may put the IMF in an
‘impossible position’, which hinders the
Financial Architecture to be chronically
incomplete.
This was only one of the
inconsistencies that were highlighted
about the role of the IMF: Professor
Woods (Oxford university) pointed out the
tension between the IMF as an adapting
as opposed to a learning institution, which
overlaps to that between its ‘bureaucratic’
role as a board for technical analysis and
its political role of advisor to countries.
Professor Leech (Warwick University),
relying on an innovative approach,
showed how the actual power of a country
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 21 of 28
within international institutions is actually
rather different from that stated in its
‘formal’ weighted system of voting. For
instance, the US turn out to have an even
bigger power than the 17.11 share of
votes it has in the IMF.
Such doubts on the role of the
IMF were also apparent in the discussion
over two of the major proposals on the
restructuring of sovereign debt. The socalled statutory approach, proposed by
the IMF itself, likens sovereign debt to
corporate debt and makes it subject to the
US bankruptcy law procedures, with the
IMF acting as the court. No wonder that a
reform that would assign even more power
to the IMF than what it currently has was
likely to be seen with suspicion by its
numerous detractors. As a matter of fact,
even the IMF decided not to push too
much on this reform in the recent spring
meeting. Hence, an alternative proposal,
which was originally endorsed by
Professor Portes, is attracting more favour
among the commentators. This is called
contractual as it encourages creditors to
change the terms of the bond by means of
agreements between themselves. Such
changes require qualified majorities, which
are explicitly specified in the so-called
Collective Action Clauses, which can be
enforced by Court Laws such as New York
and London.
However, even admitting that the
success of the contractual over the
statutory approach is now widely
accepted, which prompted Professor Miller
(Warwick University) to ‘crown’ Professor
Portes as the ‘inventor’ of the contractual
approach, this seems after all only the first
step to a comprehensive reform of the
global financial architecture. In the words
of Kenneth Kletzer (University of
California, Santa Cruz), the discussion on
sovereign debt restructuring only seems to
direct too much attention to building better
morgues. And that some new thought
must be directed to these issues was also
apparent in the concluding remarks of the
IMF representative Matthew Fisher, who
pointed out that as a result of the bad
management of the Argentinian default, a
serious lack of confidence is spreading
among financial investors about lending to
developing countries, as witnessed by the
recent trend of decreasing capital flows
directing toward such markets. If the
process of too fast a capital account
liberalisation had even got beyond the
mark of the original Washington
Consensus agenda, this new, and slowly
spreading, contagion seems likely to call
for the setting of an entirely new agenda
for the next years. The CSGR Conference
has hopefully helped to move the first
steps into that direction.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 22 of 28
HIV / AIDS and Security
Mariam (Mimi) Fawaz (MA in IR)
The HIV/AIDS pandemic is one
that is ravaging the continent of Africa as it
dramatically reduces life expectancy. It
leaves its imprint on all regions of the
world, as at the end of 2000 36 million
people were HIV positive. However, it has
undoubtedly hit the hardest in subSaharan Africa in which 70% of those
infected with HIV/AIDS are situated. The
extent and magnitude of the epidemic is
very real as it is expected that by 2005
100 million new infections will arise. It is
not the first time in human history that a
disease has infiltrated societies to cause
large-scale misery as with the bubonic
plague in the 1300s and the world wide
influenza epidemic from 1918-19.
However, none of these killers were on the
same scale of destruction as AIDS. The
link between HIV/AIDS and security is one
that is increasingly being realised as the
disease weakens the basis of a state’s
defense capacity-that of the military.
What constitutes security?
Security has traditionally been defined
within the neo-realist orthodoxy in which
the military is the focal point in preserving
the territorial sovereignty of a state from
external threats. As a result of this, the
military pillar has taken precedence over
what security entails right until the end of
the Cold War. If one is to look at security
through the lens of the neo-realist tradition
and its emphasis on the military, one
would see that the state which is the
coherent whole of this paradigm is being
undermined as the military has one of the
highest infection rates, varying from 50%
in the Congo to 80% in Zimbabwe.
Why is the virus able to easily
penetrate into the military institution? As a
group, the army is in great peril as they
recruit members from a high-risk group of
15-24 year old’s. Furthermore, the postCold war era has brought along with it
many intra and interstate conflicts in which
the army is increasingly called upon to be
deployed to restore stability. As they are
away from home for long periods of time,
military personnel engage in ‘high risk’
behaviour, for instance drugs, alcohol as
well as attracting sex workers, which
commingled, put them at high risk. This is
detrimental to the military, as skilled
members are lost to HIV/AIDS, which
hinders the militaries capacity to be
effective, prepared and readily deployed.
Outside forces can use this weakness to
infiltrate states that are greatly affected by
HIV/AIDS. Furthermore, once militaries
are injected back into their societies they
spread the disease in low seroprevalence
communities.
However, one argument that must
be brought to attention is the debate as to
whether HIV/AIDS is a traditional security
issue or a non-traditional security issue
such as human security. What does
human security encapsulate? In contrast
to traditional security, which takes the
state as the referent, human security takes
the individual as its central focus.
Therefore, human security can
encompass economic, personal and the
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 23 of 28
encompass economic, personal and
political security. Under the rubric of
human security non-traditional definitions
of security such as HIV/AIDS, which have
been left on the periphery even though
they greatly undermine human survival on
a massive scale, are brought to the
forefront.
In addition to the threat HIV/AIDS
poses to the military, it is being used in
many societies as a ‘new’ weapon of war.
In these unstable societies, war is a
breeding ground for HIV/AIDS as it
enables it to flourish since the product of
war is mass displacement of peoples and
refugees, which are identified as prime
vulnerable targets. This abuse has been
documented in the widespread gang
rapes of women in Sierra Leone,
Democratic Republic of Congo and
Rwanda. Regardless of whether one looks
at HIV/AIDS as undermining the pillar of
the traditional definition of security or
whether it is a human security issue, the
fact is that HIV/AIDS is a real threat to the
security of civil societies as well as to the
national security of developing countries
due to their interaction with each other.
The tide needs to be turned, as security
has for too long been defined in very
limited terms.
Rethinking security requires new
questions: Security for whom?’ Who sets
the boundaries of what is or should be
security? For the majority of the
developing world, the Western definition of
security is ill equipped to deal with the
pressing needs of the post Cold War era
since for the developing world HIV/AIDS
may be a slow killer, but nevertheless real
as it wipes out whole communities. The
way we perceive security is essential. If
issues, such as HIV/AIDS, which have
been previously regulated to the domain
of low politics, are moved to the arena of
high politics, the world would open its eyes
and see that due attention must be given
to this urgent matter, for if not, it may for a
long time be left on the margins without
due attention. In short, as put forth by
Singer it is a tragic irony that the military,
which is relied upon to protect people, is
the very group that is putting them at even
greater risk. (Singer, ‘AIDS and
International Security’, 44(1), 2002, p.155)
Re-thinking development studies: Interview
with the Director of the CSGR
Professor Richard Higgott
(Director of the CSGR, Professor of IPE)
Interview by Joerg Wiegratz (MA in IPE)
Questions:
From your perspective, what were the
main concerns and core features of the
academic development debate since the
Second World War? What, in this regard,
were some of the failures of scholars
during that period, in the sense that their
concepts were stemmed from flawed
paradigms or assumptions?
Prof. Higgott:
Prof. Richard Higgott
The nature of the development
studies in the post-WWII era was
conditioned
principally
by
the
decolonisation
process.
Basic
understanding after WWII was that it was
really not acceptable for major powers to
have colonies.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 24 of 28
So, the question was, to what extent could
colonies be granted their independency in
such a way that allowed them to be
functioning economic and political entities.
The dominant paradigm, the early
paradigm, was effectively what came to be
known as modernisation theory which was
build around an understanding that there
would be the diffusion of capital,
technology and culture to developing
countries. Modernisation in so many ways
was a short-hand for westernisation, under
with the provision of these three things,
capital, technology and culture, and the
possibility of developing countries
engaging in what Walt Rostow called takeoff into self-sustained growth could be
underwritten. The thing which we always
need to remember, however, is the
political context in which this took place.
The determining structural factor, of
course, was the Cold War. The
decolonisation of the British, French,
Dutch empires was to be seen quite
specifically in the Cold War context, as
was the relationship with other nontraditional colonial but developing
countries, again in the wider Cold War
context. The basic problem was that the
model of modernisation, as this process of
take-off into self-sustained growth, was
flawed, for several reasons. One, because
it took no account of the cultural and
historical circumstances in which many of
these western systems and institutions
were to be located. Two, it took no
account really of levels of economic
development or the existing structures of
the global economic order which
effectively made it very difficult for
developing countries actually to fit in to
this process in a way that the theoretical
perspectives suggested. At a political
level, the understanding of good
governance as some kind of Weberian
rationalist, bureaucratic approach towards
administration again was not culturally
sensitive.
That was the early face. What
happened following that was that there
was a period of intense pessimism as the
modernisation project went belly-up. There
was a process of stagnation, political
instability, lots of military coups and
insurrections. Modernisation theory as the
idea of the promotion of development and
growth gave way to a much more ordercentred theory of stability in the
developing world. And this prevailed
throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The
other important thing that happened to
make us rethink an during that time of the
1960s and 1970s: alternative more radical
development strategies became attractive,
particularly dependency theory, ideas that
import substitution should take
precedence over export-oriented growth,
the notion of some kind of aggregated
Third World demanding a new
international economic order.
All these were fashionable
movements at that time. By the end of the
1970s of course we begun to realize it was
necessary to disaggregate the Third
World. It was no longer appropriate to
think of Latin American, African and Asian
countries all simply being of a type. It was
quite clear that those states of developing
East-Asia that had undergone processes
of industrial expansion and outwardoriented industrialisation had actually
undergone processes of quite dramatic
growth. It’s true, much of this growth was
brutal, lopsided and exploitative. But
nevertheless, it was growth all the same.
So, you got that strange kind of
convergence of ideas from Marxists on the
left and some more orthodox neo-classical
economists on the right basically
advocating the same kind of policy
prescriptions: radical, export-oriented
industrialisation strategies. That gave rise
to that kind of process of the newly
industrialised economies in the 1980s and
through the 1990s. It also very much tight
in with the whole kind of liberalisation and
de-regulation agenda that occurred in the
late 1970s: The arrival of Margaret
Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and the New
Neo-liberal, pushing the global economy.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Question:
If we do not want to get into the
theoretical and analytical traps again in
the future, what then are the lessons
which we have to learn from the process
or evolution of development studies as
you have just described it?
Prof. Higgott:
I think, that the obvious lesson is
that we don’t assume the existence of one
uniformed pattern. There is more than one
way to ‘skin a cat’ and there is certainly
more than one route towards development
strategies. And, it’s quite clear as we are
in the early stage of the 21st century there
is a growing recognition that some of the
agenda items of the major international
institutions for example, what we might
call those elements of the postWashington consensus, rub up against
alternative demands for accountability,
representation and greater democratic
import from developing countries. We do
have, I think, in the early 21st century, a
bit of a institutional stalemate. There is a
bigger crisis of legitimacy in the
international institutions now more than at
any time in the previous couples of
decades.
Question:
You said before, that there was a
convergence of policy prescriptions
between Marxist scholars and neoclassical economists in the 1980s. Can
you explain that in more detail?
Prof. Higgott:
Well, they had a different
normative agenda. But if you were a
Marxist for example, you felt that it was
actually necessary to go through what we
might call a capitalist stage of
development. You got that seminal work
by Bill Warren in the mid-1970s where he
talked about the need for capitalist
development in the Third World before you
can achieve some kind of socialist
alternative. The policy prescriptions of
course were the introduction of capitalist
forms of economic organisation. In many
ways not dissimilar to those kinds of forms
of economic organisation that a neo-liberal
economist would advocate.
Question:
What happened to that very phenomena
of convergence?
Prof. Higgott:
Basically, the kind of Marxist position just
kind of fell away. The popularity of Marxist
analysis in the late 1970s and early 1980s
disappeared almost under the kind of the
onslaught of that kind of neo-liberal
agenda of the 1980s and the 1990s.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 25 of 28
That give rise to the believe that there was
some kind of consensus that had been
achieved in development studies. This
prevailed quite strongly throughout the
1980s and the early parts of the 1990s
until, I think, we saw a dramatic realisation
that there were as many problems
associated with this as there were
possibilities and potentials. Things like the
increasing poverty and stagnation in
Africa, the Asian financial crisis, the
spread of these crises to Latin America
and the post-Cold War Central and
Eastern Europe demonstrated the
limitations of the neo-liberal model.
Page 26 of 28
Questions:
Considering the growing field of
globalisation studies, is the study of
development still relevant from your point
of view? If so, what could be future issues
for students of development? Where do
you see their specific future contribution to
the broader social science field?
Prof. Higgott:
One of the problems with development
studies is that it always had a kind of a
‘ghetto-mentality’. Globalisation studies is
a catch-all. It is very difficult to decide
what is not legitimate for a study under the
rubric of globalisation. Alternatively,
development was too tightly focused.
What we need is a balance between a
recognition of those particular issues and
activities that are quite clearly
development-centred, basically about
poverty eradication and supporting
developing countries, but the degree to
which they are part of the wider structural
environment that we call contemporary
globalisation: a liberal trading system, a
deregulated financial system, a system
that attempts to minimize state regulation
and involvement in these kinds of process.
So, globalisation questions and
development questions are very similar.
The important thing is that from the
perspective of development studies, if you
like, resistance from below as opposed to
imposition from the top, many of the
solutions look to be not attainable. Many
developing countries see themselves in
the global economic order as rule-takers
rather than rule-makers. They see
themselves as having no serious import
into the institutional reform of the major
bodies like the IMF, the World Bank, and
the WTO. Of course, this means that
these bodies lack legitimacy. This is in
some ways a bigger problem for the
developed countries as it is for the
developing countries.
Questions:
Again, what could be a specific
contribution of students of development to
the broader social science field? What
kind of perspective, or main insights, could
they offer in the future?
Prof. Higgott:
I think, we need to resist the question. It’s
not a question of who gives what, or who
takes what. It’s a question of how we
analyse contemporary events and what
kinds of tools that we bring to this mode of
analysis and subsequent kind of policy
prescriptions. I think, to try and identify a
development studies perspective does
harm to the complexity of the
contemporary era.
Questions :
The last question we would like to ask
you: What do you think is missing in most
curricula of development programmes in
our universities, especially in Great
Britain? And, if we would like to be more
interdisciplinary, what would be a
promising mix of scientific fields in this
respect?
Prof. Higgott:
I can’t honestly tell you, because I don’t
teach development studies. I don’t know
what people’s syllabus look like. But if
someone said to me you got to teach
development studies next year, there are
three or four things that I would want to
have involved in a curriculum. One would
be a good course in basic economic
theory, and by that I do not mean dramatic
exercises in modelling but understanding
the importance of markets. Secondly, I
would want a good dose of institutional
theory that looks at the relationship
between markets and states. Thirdly, I
would want a strong ethical input into this,
that dealt with questions about the nature
of ethicality under conditions of
globalisation. And fourthly, I think it’s
important that you got some good, rich
empirical case work across the spectrum
of the developing world that allows you to
see the degree to which various elements
of economic, social and political theory fit
or don’t fit in developing countries.
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
By Stephen Grey (MA in GDG)
As I started my MA in
Globalisation and Development back in
September, I had many questions in my
mind. How would I find going back into
education after a year out? How would I
enjoy the course?
How would the
transition from a Humanities BA to a
Social Sciences MA work out? Suffice to
say these were questions I quickly found
positive answers to as I found myself
enjoying the both the course and the
people at Warwick. Yet, the one question
that I found asking myself more than any
other was, how will the skills and
knowledge I will learn on the course
transfer to what is happening out in the
“real world”?
As it happened, the academic
year 2002-2003 was one in which a
wealth of events occurred that allowed me
to put the debates and theories into
practice. Of the major events that have
occurred among others, we have seen the
collapse of the Argentinian economy, one
of the perceived strongest economies in
South America. Was this due to
globalisation and the failure of IMF
imposed structural adjustment policies or
the fact the country did not liberalise
enough? We have seen the outbreak of
the SAR’s virus that has had global
implications on how to stop it spreading
and whether national responses could be
coordinated to stop it. We have seen
many companies in the developed world
move production to the developing world
and have again seen anti-globalisation
demonstrations at the G8 meetings as
many countries suffer from the
liberalisation of their markets and
economy whilst others gain. Does this
prove that big business and the private
sector is exploitative of developing
countries or are they in fact legitimate and
efficient drivers of development? Is there
any alternative and can states exercise
any control over global economics and big
business? Does this prove that that the
on the North or will these changes lead to
individual countries eventual prosperity
within the global community? How do
such production structure changes affect
both the developed and developing world
and how does gender fit into the larger
picture?
Yet of the events this year that
have occurred, the one that has asked the
most questions and illustrated the course
has been the Iraq war. We have seen
vicious horse trading for votes in the
security council by both the pro and anti
war countries based on increased
economic aid to the smaller countries.
What does such tactics mean for the
current development paradigm if
international decisions can be influenced
by economics? On the streets, from
London to San Francisco to Jakarta, we
have seen the rise of global social
movements as people have been brought
together through traditional and through
multimedia organisation, to gather a global
movement into action. Have such actions
got a long-term future and can they be
effective and provoke change? Does the
war prove that globalisation is an
American led imperialist project,
steamrollering through their needs and
wants as the contracts for reconstruction
and oil are drawn up? Or does it prove
that the world was unable to respond to
the genuine global security concerns of
the world’s super power that has now
evoked change for the better and the
liberation of a people now free to follow
their own political, economic and social
betterment? Now Saddam has gone, how
will this effect social and economic change
within the country?
Will the many
development issues the course has
informed us of be addressed and a course
of action suitable implemented? Above
all, will the ordinary Iraqi be better off for
these actions?
As I ponder these questions, I
wonder what events lay around the corner
to next put the course into practice?
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003
Page 27 of 28
Globalisation, Governance and Development
in Practice
South has become even more dependent
Warwick Global
Development
Society
For a better future…
General Info :
Shahida. A. Hamid
(President)
Nia Williams
(Secretary)
General Email :
su338@sunion.warwick.
ac.uk
Next Issue in September.
To all the readers, good vacation and for
students who are writings a dissertation,
Good luck!
Our Mission Statement
The WGDS has been established
primarily as a forum for debate and
discourse for anyone with an interest in
the Development field. We hope to further
understanding and awareness of
development theory and practice through
a programme of talks and events. Our
programme intends to cover a variety of
topics from global governance, to the role
of trans-national corporations in today's
world, to the oft unexplored gendered
dimensions of development. We hope
to provide a critique of the dominan
models of development and to conceive
of alternate paths for the future. In
addition to inviting academics and
practitioners to host lectures we want to
know what YOU think, therefore each
meeting will be an opportunity to voice
your concerns or personal perspective
on the development process.
We’re on the Web!
See us at:
http://www.sunion.warwick.
ac.uk/socs/su338
To become a Member of the Society
Simply go register at the Union North at the Secretariat
For Further Information about the
News Letter or submission of
articles please contact :
Martin Franche
M.Franche@warwick.ac.uk
Warwick Global Development Society all rights reserved  2003