coping with globalization

Netherlands

Development Assistance

Research Council

Coping with Globalization

The Need for Research Concerning the Local Response to Globalization in Developing Countries

Pub

lica

tion

no.

20

RA

WO

O

Coping w

ith Globalization

RAWOO, the Netherlands Development AssistanceResearch Council, was established at the request ofthe Minister for Development Cooperation, also onbehalf of the Minister of Education, Culture andScience, and the Minister of Agriculture, NatureManagement and Fisheries. Its mission is to advisethe government on matters of policy regardingresearch on development problems, and to keep thegovernment informed of developments in this area.

RAWOO is part of the system of Sector Councilsfor research. Their job is to attune research to theneeds of society and to ensure an optimal matchbetween supply and demand in the different fields ofresearch for which they are responsible. In the caseof RAWOO, the needs in question are these ofsocieties in developing countries. Sector Councilsfunction on the basis of tripartite discussion betweengovernment, researchers and the users of research.

The Council has fifteen members including thechairman, plus one advisor from each of the threeministries. Six of the members come fromdeveloping countries. Members are appointed asindividuals rather than as representatives.

RAWOO Kortenaerkade 11P.O. Box 297772502 LT The HagueThe Netherlandstel. +31 70 4260331fax: +31 70 4260329Email: [email protected] address: www.rawoo.nl

© 2000Netherlands Development Assistance ResearchCouncil (RAWOO), The Hague

ISBN 90-71367-28-2

Council membership:

Chairman mr G.H.O van Maanen

Members Dr I.S.A. BaudProf.dr ir J.BoumaDr M. Diouf Dr M. GuhathakurtaMs S. Montaño VirreiraProf. C. MukherjeeMs Nguyen Thi KinhProf. dr J.B. OpschoorProf. dr J.M. RichtersProf. dr E.J. RuitenbergProf. dr W.J.J. SchipperProf. J.J. SembojaDr M.C. van Walt van Praag

AdvisorsDr J.E. van Dam (Ministry of OC&W)ir L.C. Smits (Ministry of LNV)drs L. Boer (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, DGIS)

Netherlands

Development Assistance

Research Council

Coping with Globalization

The Need for Research Concerning the Local Response to Globalization in Developing Countries

Pub

lica

tion

no.

20

September 2000

3

Preface 5

Executive Summary 7

Introduction 11

I. Overview of the scientific debate on globalization 13

I.1 Consensus and controversy over globalization13I.2 Globalization issues on which there is consensus13I.3 Controversial issues15

II. Globalization in Tanzania and Bolivia 19

II.1 The economic, socio-political and cultural dimensions of globalization in the South19II.2 Globalization opportunities for the South: what the workshops recommend22

II.2.1 Workshop recommendations concerning globalization policies22II.2.2 Workshop recommendations concerning globalization research23II.2.3 Workshop recommendations for follow-up24

III. RAWOO proposal 25

III.1 Towards a program of research on the local response to globalization in developing countries25III.1.1 Focus: synthesizing themes25III.1.2 Research for empowerment27

III.2.1 Program development phase29

Annexes 31

Annex 1. Members of the RAWOO Working Group GlobalizationAnnex 2. Selected References for Part IAnnex 3. Workshop in TanzaniaAnnex 4. Workshop in BoliviaAnnex 5. Consultation of the Dutch research community

Contents

Globalization can be defined as an increase inworld-wide interconnectedness. It is a process,

the power and momentum of which are derivedfrom growth in market capitalism and technologicaladvances in communication. Most of the debateabout globalization concerns the economic dimensionof this complex process, but it is clear that thephenomenon also has socio-political, cultural andecological dimensions. RAWOO, while exploringthe need for research on globalization, has givenattention to these other aspects from the outset.

There is little doubt that globalization has producedsignificant gains at the global level. In manyquarters, however, unqualified optimism about thebenefits of globalization is giving way to a moremoderate view which acknowledges that these gainshave been concentrated in a few countries, while alarge part of the world is left with only the costs.

On a worldwide level, globalization has facilitatedthe growth of foreign trade. Goods and services,capital, technology and labour all move more freelyacross borders. This in turn has fostered growth andhigher standards of living in the participatingeconomies. Between 1980 and 1997, internationaltrade in goods and services tripled in volume, withexports and imports growing at about an equal rate.At the same time, increased foreign investments,media expansion and Internet connections facili-tated the transfer of technology and providedopportunities for reducing differences in product-ivity. Between 1990 and 1997, the total volume offoreign direct investment doubled.

In addition to economic gains, there have been significant benefits in the areas of culture andgovernance. Public awareness of issues such ashuman rights, democracy and gender equality hasincreased significantly as a result of greater accessto newspapers, radio, television, telephones,computers and the Internet. Access to foreign newsis no longer a monopoly of the state or a privilegeof certain segments of the population.

Countries gain from globalization when they areable to take advantage of the ready access to capitalmarkets, information and technology, and to benefitfrom the improved competitive environment whichenables them to exploit their relative strengths. Thisleads to improved allocative efficiency for purposesof growth, human development and povertyreduction.. Unfortunately, however, experience hasshown that the process of globalization producesboth winners and losers.

Losers have suffered from the following. 1. The gap between rich and poor countries has

increased rapidly in recent years. The differencein income between the 20 per cent of the worldpopulation that lives in rich countries and the 20per cent that lives in the poorest countries was afactor of 30 to 1 in 1960. By 1990 the ratio was60:1 and by 1997, 74:1. This trend will continueat an ever faster rate as the flow of capital, newtechnologies, skilled labour and informationcontinues to favour the industrialized world.

2. Within loser countries, differences in incomelevel are rapidly becoming wider. Globalizationfavours activities in the modern (usually large-scale and capital-intensive) sector which areskill-intensive. Because links between themodern sector and the informal sector are weak,knowledge is not transferred between the twosectors and differences in rates of productivitypersist. This in turn perpetuates inequality inearnings. In addition, globalization favoursmarket-oriented sectors and completely passes bythe sectors oriented towards subsistenceproduction.

3. The rapid depletion of natural resources and theenvironment is taking a greater toll in poorcountries than elsewhere. Between 1990 and1995, for instance, deforestation around theworld is estimated to have taken place at anaverage annual rate of approximately 20 squarekilometres for every one million inhabitants. For sub-Saharan Africa this figure was 58.Globalization has made it easier for foreigncompanies working in league with unscrupulouslocals to overexploit natural resources in defianceof the law.

4. Countries are losing national control overgovernance and culture. Globalization clearly haspositive effects in this area, and these have beenacknowledged. But distinctly negative effectshave also emerged. First and foremost in devel-oping countries is the fact that the state has lostits ability to determine and implement policies ofits own. The liberalization required by donorsaiming to restructure the economy has considerablyreduced the means that governments have at theirdisposal for carrying out their own programmesof law enforcement and development. Corruptionand crime - mainly in the form of illicit tradingin drugs, women and weapons - have increased.Deterioration in standards of living is making lifeless secure for many people. This is fosteringwidespread fundamentalism, which not onlyincreases social tension and insecurity but alsohas a negative effect on the economy since

Preface

5

solutions to social and economic problems aresought in prayer rather than in work. All of thisputs a strain on families as poverty and diseasestrike all the harder, and as marriages break upand children revolt.

Why are so many developing countries losers in theglobalization process and how can they reverse thistrend? Instead of looking for answers in the vastliterature produced in the North on the subject ofglobalization, RAWOO decided to explore thedebate on this issue taking place in the South. Two workshops, one in Tanzania and one in Bolivia,served as the main sources of information. Civilservants, researchers, and representatives of civilsociety and the private sector took part in the work-shops, discussing how globalization was affectingtheir countries and what kind of policies theyneeded in order to benefit from globalization.

Based on their analysis, the workshop participantsproduced an impressive list of factors and recom-mendations for dealing with those factors. Thereport summarizes these in Part II. What we wish tocommunicate here is the participants’ sense ofurgency. If developing countries are not to be com-pletely marginalized by globalization, concertedaction must take place immediately, they said. They also called for decidedly more pro-activeintervention on the part of the various nationalstakeholders: especially government, but also theprivate sector, community organizations and NGOs.

Another important conclusion was that the com-plexities of globalization make it difficult for poorcountries even to grasp the process much less togain any control over it. Workshop participants feltthat there is a clear need to develop knowledge andproblem-solving capacity that is directly applicableto the local management of globalization in theircountries.

In response to this need, RAWOO proposes todevelop a long-term programme of capacity-building for research pertaining to a local response

to globalization.We propose to do this initially intwo countries: Tanzania and Bolivia. The pro-gramme’s focus will be on the effects of global-ization at the local level, and on what government,civil society and private industry can do at thislevel to improve local people’s access to thebenefits of globalization.

At this stage, RAWOO has opted not to select anyspecific aspects of globalization to be the subjectsof research. Instead, three general themes arepresented as they emerged from the workshops: (1) Finding a balance between ‘global’ and ‘local’culture; (2) Governance issues; and (3) A generaldevelopment strategy to be followed by countries inthe South. RAWOO expects that as the researchprogramme takes shape in Tanzania and Bolivia,more specific themes will be chosen in a partici-patory way.

The development of such a research programmewill involve researchers from Tanzania and Boliviaas well as policy-makers and representatives ofcivil society and private industry in those countries.Together they will formulate a research agenda.Researchers from the Netherlands will be involvedin ways appropriate to RAWOO’s principles. Theirefforts must serve the purpose of capacity enhance-ment and sustainability and take the participatoryapproach.

On behalf of RAWOO’s Globalization WorkingGroup, I would like to thank everyone who hascontributed to the preparation of this advisoryreport. Special thanks are owed to the Research forPoverty Alleviation Programme (REPOA) inTanzania, to the Tanzanian chapter of the Societyfor International Development (SID), and to theCentro de Estudios par el Desarrollo Laboral yAgrario (CEDLA) in Bolivia for organizing theworkshops on globalization in their countries.

Prof. J.J. SembojaChairman of RAWOO’s Globalization Working Group

Preface

6

The Netherlands Development Assistance ResearchCouncil (RAWOO) decided to put globalization onits agenda for two reasons. It has become animportant phenomenon, and there is cause forconcern about the fact that the opportunitiesassociated with globalization are seized mainly byindustrialized countries, by a few newlyindustrialized countries, and by relatively smallelites within developing countries, while othercountries and groups are feeling only the negativeeffects of globalization.

RAWOO launched a process of exploration toassess the need for increasing knowledge andcapacities that could help developing countries tobetter understand the impact that globalizationprocesses are having on them, and that could helpthem to decide how they can best respond with theirown policy and action.

Three RAWOO principles guided the explorationprocess:• Research must respond to the needs of

developing countries. Researchers as well as keylocal stakeholders in government and society-at-large must be drawn into the exploration process.

• The role of research must be enhanced throughinstitutional development that increases researchcapacities in developing countries.

• Partnerships on an equal footing betweenresearchers in South and North are an importantinstrument for generating knowledge andbuilding capacity.

An initial RAWOO study revealed a wealth ofpublications on globalization, but views fromsouthern countries on what globalization means forthem are not penetrating widely or deeply into thegeneral debate. Two reviews of publicationsspecifically from the South indicate thatglobalization has a profound impact on developingcountries – positive as well as negative – and thatthere is indeed deep concern about its negativeeffects. Not much empirical work has been done,however, on local and sectoral problems resultingfrom globalization.

In order to take a closer look at globalization as aresearch topic in countries in the South and toascertain the need for supporting this research,RAWOO decided to gather first-hand views ofresearchers and stakeholders through workshopsheld for this purpose in Tanzania and Bolivia. Civilservants, researchers, and representatives of civilsociety took part in the workshops, discussing the

effects of globalization on their countries and theneed to acquire more knowledge aboutglobalization in order to be able to benefit from it.

Part I: Overview of the scientificdebate on globalization

Before proceeding to present the outcomes of theworkshops, the report (part I) gives an indication ofthe state of affairs in the academic debate onglobalization. On some issues there is consensus,over other issues there is controversy.

Part II: Globalization in Tanzania and Bolivia

Part II of the report presents the workshopparticipants’ assessment of the implications ofglobalization in the two countries. They had beenasked to consider four dimensions of globalization:economic, socio-political, cultural, and ecological.

The economic, socio-political and culturaldimensions of globalization in the South

Economic dimensionThe main theme of the discussions on the economicdimension of globalization was the failure ofeconomic liberalization policies to bring economicgrowth to anyone but a small elite. This, togetherwith reduced opportunities in the public andpeasant sectors, has increased unemployment andunderemployment. The informal sector has had toabsorb this. In Bolivia it was also reported thatwomen and young people working in the informalsector have been forced into the poorest-payingactivities.

Socio-political dimension (governance)In the discussions on the socio-politicaldimension of globalization, the dominant themewas the weakness of the state and its inability toinfluence international decision-making, tomanage the economy, and to invest effectively inhuman and social capital – for example througheducation and health care. Organizationsrepresenting workers, peasants and other largeinterest groups have also been weakened byliberalization policies.

Cultural dimensionThe discussions on the cultural dimension ofglobalization revolved around the confusionresulting from all the abrupt changes brought about by globalization. The report from theBolivian workshop says that ‘the knowledge mapsthat helped us fix horizons and select possible

Executive Summary

7

routes have been destroyed.’ Ethnic and religiousmovements that offer simplistic solutions forsocietal problems provide an easy escape but carrya high risk of internal conflict.

Ecological dimensionAttention was drawn to the link betweenglobalization and the increased depletion of naturalresources and deterioration of the environment.

Workshop recommendations concerning globalization policies

The general conclusion of the workshops was thatglobalization costs Tanzania and Bolivia more thanit benefits them. Each of these countries needs todevelop strategies for reversing this imbalancewhich are based on its own broad vision on whatglobalization means and how the country can bestdeal with it. Rejecting the current orthodoxyregarding the policies that developing countriesshould follow may have to be the first step,followed by the design of alternative models ofdevelopment which imply a phased and controlledintegration into global systems.

An important element in any globalization strategy– in the eyes of the workshop participants – is thedevelopment of a strong industrial sector based onmodern technology, organized along modern linesand capable of competing on global markets.Learning from successful entrepreneurs would beone way to achieve this. At the same time, however,industrial development policies should guaranteeproper working conditions.

Participants indicated that the state should nodoubt play a strong role in industrial development,much as it has in East Asian countries. The statealso has a major role to play in education andtraining, and it should be strengthened to hold itsown in such international forums as the WorldTrade Organization and the International MonetaryFund.

A stronger state is needed, but it should be a statesupported by the people and responsive to thepeople to a much larger degree than has been thecase in recent history. This will require new modelsof representation which are adapted to localconditions rather than merely following westernexamples.

According to the workshop participants, effortsshould be directed towards achieving moreeffective cooperation between neighbouring statesthrough regional organizations.

Cultural policies emerged from the workshops asanother priority. The challenge put forward by theworkshops is how to encourage the developmentof a society that can cope with globalization but isstill based on principles which are supported bythe people in accordance with local behaviouralpatterns, attitudes, beliefs and values. Anotherchallenge is how to promote multiculturalismand cultural integration in order to avoid ethnicconflict.

Workshop recommendations regarding globalization research

Workshop participants felt that the complexitiesinvolved will require a major research effort ifsound policies are to be proposed. The researchshould be multidisciplinary: empirical studies thatexamine the concrete effects of globalization ondifferent sectors, societal groups and regions. Ifresearch is to have relevance for policy-making, itshould be based on needs determined inconsultation with policy-makers and end users.

The Bolivian workshop assigned priority to thefollowing research areas: small rural and smallurban producers, the manufacturing industry(domestic and export), privatized former state-owned industries, and women and youth and theirorganizations.

It is impossible to understand the effects ofglobalization at the local level without studyingprocesses at the regional, national and globallevels. Research should be directed towards thecomplete chain of processes.

Workshop recommendations for following up the workshops

In Tanzania, a working group was formed for thepurpose of preparing proposals for a policy-oriented research agenda. In Bolivia, workshopparticipants resolved to urge their ownorganizations to incorporate the research agendaformulated at the workshop into their own researchprogrammes. They also decided to explore thepossibilities of establishing a Latin Americannetwork of research institutions studyingglobalization.

Executive Summary

8

In the evaluation of the workshops it was pointedout that the gender dimension and theenvironmental dimension of globalization had notreceived enough attention. This should be correctedduring the follow-up.

Both sets of participants and evaluators concludedthat the workshops had been valuable startingpoints for a highly relevant discussion, whichshould be continued in both Tanzania and Bolivia.RAWOO was asked to support this process.

Part III. RAWOO proposalPart III of the report presents RAWOO’s proposalfor a programme of research on the local responseto globalization in developing countries. Theproposal is based on the information presented inpart II. RAWOO basically endorses the conclusionsof the workshops, although it thinks thatglobalization could offer even more researchopportunities than the workshops have suggested.

Three themes emerged from the discussions in theworkshops in Tanzania and Bolivia:

1. How to find a balance between ‘global’ and‘local’ culture: how to achieve – througheducation and consciousness-raising – a mix of‘global’ and ‘local’ culture which gives peopleconfidence to deal with the rapid changesfollowing globalization.

2. Governance issues: how to increase thecapacity of the state without making it thecumbersome machinery, dominated by a fewvested interests, that obstructed rather thanpromoted development in the past. How tomake it a state in dialogue with its citizensthrough the organizations of civil society.

3. Development of alternative economic strategieswithin the parameters of globalization: how toachieve phased and controlled integration intothe world market while at the same timeensuring that peasants and other vulnerablegroups are protected.

The themes can serve as a basis for focus duringthe programme-development phase, when researchneeds in countries of the South will be definedmore specifically.

As far as the research process is concerned, anapproach is needed that takes into account thecomplexity of the problem and the need to involvestakeholders in the agenda-setting process. Thisapproach will have to be needs-based and user-

oriented and contribute to building capacities forresearch and the formulation of policy.

The proposed programme will target thestakeholdersat national, regional and local levelswho need knowledge in order to respond toglobalization. These stakeholders can be found ingovernment, in the private sector and in civilsociety.1 In RAWOO’s view, the researchprogramme should begin with locally identifiedneeds and ownership, and proceed in the directionof cooperation above the local level. RAWOOenvisages a programmatic approach whichcombines a local agenda-setting process withextension to other levels, including – whereappropriate – other countries of the region.

As far as capacity-building is concerned, theprogramme will support strategic as well as action-oriented research that is conducted by the academiccommunity, government and NGOs, includingprivate sector organizations, local communityorganizations and women’s movements. Capacitywill grow through involvement in agenda-setting,research management, and the development of newmethods for policy-oriented, participatory research,and through dialogue and cooperation betweeninterest groups.

Input from the Dutch research community will bemobilized where it is relevant. Dutch researcherscan help to access knowledge available in theNorth.

In line with the above proposals and with therequest to this effect that resulted from theworkshops in Tanzania and Bolivia, RAWOOrecommends the following:

The next step should be a one-year programmingphase for working out a more detailed researchagenda to address the needs in Bolivia andTanzania.

After an institution is designated to lead theresearch programme and a network of institutionsare identified that will help to formulate theprogramme, a dialogue should be initiated aboutstrategies for dealing with globalization, and policystudies should be commissioned on a number ofthemes which merit priority. Further agenda-settingshould be based on the outcome of these studiesand of the policy dialogue on strategy. Theprobable result will be a list of priority sectors forintervention and related priority areas for research.

Executive Summary

9

1. The Bolivian workshoprecommended working with thefollowing sectors of society: smallrural producers, small urbanproducers, the manufacturingindustry, the export manufacturingsector, privatized (formerly state-owned) industries, women andyouth and their organizations.

Such a programming approach will ensure that aresearch agenda is drafted which is in closeharmony with policy developments. RAWOO willtake responsibility for this one-year programmingphase.

At the end of the programming phase, RAWOOwill submit to the Netherlands government acomprehensive proposal for a long-termprogramme of research under the title ‘Localresponse to globalization in developing countries’.

Executive Summary

10

Background In 1997 the Netherlands Development AssistanceResearch Council (RAWOO) decided to putglobalization on its agenda for two reasons.Globalization has become an importantphenomenon, and there is cause for concern aboutthe fact that the opportunities associated with it areseized mainly by industrialized and newlyindustrializing countries, while the rest of the worldfeels mainly the negative effects of globalization.

RAWOO established a Globalization WorkingGroup from among its members,2 which was giventhe task of exploring the issues related to assessingthe need for increasing knowledge and capacitiesthat could help developing countries to betterunderstand the impact that globalization processesare having on them, and then to decide how theycan best respond with their own policy and action.

Basic principles A number of basic principles guided RAWOO in itsapproach to the task. These reflect RAWOO’smandate and the way it views research fordevelopment purposes in general. They include thefollowing:

a. In the view of RAWOO, research onglobalization issues must respond to the needsof developing countries if the findings are to berelevant for development purposes. It must beaimed at generating knowledge and insightsthat can contribute to a better understanding ofthe effects of globalization processes ondeveloping countries, and to better policyresponses and action in the public and privatesectors and at national and sub-national levels.This means that the process of developing andapplying knowledge is placed in adevelopment-oriented context. It also meansthat apart from the researchers, key localstakeholders in government and society-at-largemust be drawn into the process.

b. Capacity-building and institutionaldevelopment in the South must go hand in handwith efforts to enhance the role of research inaddressing globalization issues – not only interms of research training and staffdevelopment, but also in terms of institutionalmechanisms. Mechanisms are needed fordesigning and implementing research policies;for establishing networks with the usercommunity in government departments, NGOsand the business community; and for

disseminating and utilizing research findingsthrough effective communication andinformation channels.

c. Partnerships between researchers in South andNorth are an important instrument forgenerating and sharing knowledge, and forstrengthening developing countries’institutional capacities for designing,conducting and managing research. Suchpartnerships must be on an equal footing andbased on mutual trust, the sharing ofexperience, and a two-way learning process.

Purpose of the reportThe purpose of this report is threefold:• to examine the need for knowledge and capacity-

building relevant for local responses toglobalization in developing countries;

• to sketch the broad outline of a long-term, multi-disciplinary programme of internationalcooperation that will generate and mobilizeknowledge in this area;

• to propose a programme-development phase tobe conducted under the responsibility ofRAWOO.

MethodUnder the guidance of the RAWOO GlobalizationWorking Group, the RAWOO Secretariat firstexamined the issues related to globalization. Thisinitial study concluded that globalization is a verycomplex phenomenon, and that a vast number ofbooks and scientific articles have been published onthe subject. But most of these publications havebeen produced in industrialized countries.A number of developing countries publishscientific material on globalization (e.g. India, thePhilippines, South Africa, and several countries inLatin America), but this is not readily accessibleand for this reason is not often cited in the generalscientific literature on globalization.

In order to bring to light more of the debate aboutglobalization in the South, RAWOO commissionedtwo reviews of scientific publications onglobalization that have been produced in countriesof the South:• a review of literature concerning the economic

and socio-political dimensions of globalization;• a review of literature concerning the cultural

dimension of globalization.

These reviews involved searching databases ofeconomic, political and social science research.

Introduction

11

2. For a list of the members of theWorking Group, see Annex 1.

Both reviews revealed that globalization is having aprofound impact on developing countries and thatthere is deep concern about its negative effects. Butthe reviews did not uncover much empirical workon concrete problems in developing countries. IfRAWOO was to gain insight into globalization as aresearch topic in the South and into the need forsupporting this research, it would have to havemore firsthand information. This was the reason forthe workshops in Tanzania and Bolivia.3

The workshop in Tanzania was organized by theResearch Project on Poverty Alleviation (REPOA)and the Tanzania Chapter of the Society forInternational Development (SID). The workshop inBolivia was organized by the Centro de Estudiospara el Desarrollo Laboral y Agrario (CEDLA).Both workshops were sponsored by RAWOO.

The objectives of the workshops were:• to provide an opportunity for a professional

discussion of what globalization means for aparticular country;

• to produce a clear indication of what kind ofresearch is needed in order for a country likeTanzania or Bolivia to deal effectively withglobalization.

For both workshops, scientists from the countryand region in question prepared papers on variousdimensions of globalization. These formed thebasis for discussion. In Bolivia, a brief survey ofhow various sectors of society view globalizationprovided extra input for the workshop.

In line with the RAWOO approach, the aim was tobring together people from different sectors ofsociety to discuss what action should be taken andhow research could fortify these efforts.Participants in the workshop in Tanzania were fromvarious ministries, universities, research centres,businesses and trade unions. Participants in Boliviawere from research centres and organizations ofcivil society. They were joined by four participantsfrom Chile, Peru, Mexico and Argentina.

Tanzania and Bolivia turned out to be veryinteresting case studies since both belong to thegroup of least-developed countries and both areseverely affected by structural adjustment policies.The workshops confirmed the urgent need forconcerted action to make sure that this type ofdeveloping country is not completely marginalizedby globalization.

Other sources of information on globalization anddeveloping countries provided additional materialfor this report. RAWOO staff attended conferencesand lectures on globalization in Nijmegen (ThirdWorld Centre), The Hague (NEDA/WOTROConference), Mexico (Congress of Latin AmericanRural Sociologists) and Amsterdam (a lecture byGita Sen on globalization), and scanned relevantpublications.

A draft of the report was presented to a meeting ofresearchers working on globalization in theNetherlands. Participants in this meeting camefrom diverse fields, including political science,geography, cultural anthropology, economics andsociology. The meeting yielded useful suggestionswhich have been incorporated into the report.

Structure of the reportThe next part of the report presents, in a nutshell,an overview of the scientific debate onglobalization. Its purpose is to give the reader animpression of the state of the scientific debate onglobalization, which features consensus on someissues and controversy on other issues. Part IIsummarizes the outcome of the workshops inTanzania and Bolivia, the outcome of the congressof rural sociologists in Latin America, which washeld in Mexico, the findings of the two reviews ofglobalization literature produced in the South, andother materials. Part III outlines a framework for aprogramme of research on the local response toglobalization in developing countries and proposesa plan for a one-year period of programmepreparation.

Introduction

12

3. Tanzania and Bolivia wereselected for several reasons.RAWOO members had contactsin those countries that couldprovide quick access withoutundue expectations being raised;both countries clearly showedinterest in the topic; both were onthe list of countries selected by theDutch Minister for DevelopmentCooperation for purposes of long-term, sector-based collaboration.Consideration was also given toVietnam, Sri Lanka, the Philippinesand India, but prospects for aworkshop under these conditionsseemed less favourable in thosecountries.

I.1 Consensus and controversy overglobalization

“… ‘globalization’ is both an historical fact and apolitical football” (Stephen Toulmin, 1999).

Now, some 20 years into the sprawlingglobalization debate, the literature has advancedenough for areas of consensus and controversy tobegin to emerge. Among analysts and policy-makers in North and South, there appears to begrowing agreement as regards at least four featuresof globalization. Globalization is driven bytechnological changes, it involves thereconfiguration of states, it goes together withregionalization, and it is uneven. Another sharedunderstanding is that globalization means time-space compression, a notion vague and generalenough not to cause much stir. This means thatglobalization involves interaction across spacewhich is more intensive and with widerramifications than ever before, but which at thesame time takes place in a shorter time than everbefore. In other words, it means the experience of ashrinking world.

There is plenty of controversy as to what some ofthese features mean, however, so it is not easy todraw a sharp line between what is generally agreedupon and what is still disputed. Thus, while it isclear that globalization involves the reconfigurationof states, there is ample debate on what this entails.On the whole, globalization invites morecontroversy than consensus and the areas ofconsensus are narrow compared with thecontroversies (see Table 1).

I.2 Globalization issues on whichthere is consensus

Globalization is driven by technological change Accelerated globalization is related to the boom ininformation and communications technologies.These technologies have shaped the infrastructureof globalization in finance, capital mobility andexport-oriented business activity. Since the early1980s, through such innovations as 24-hourelectronic trading, information andmicroelectronics-based computer andtelecommunications technologies have madefinancial globalization possible. They have alsocreated the conditions for global productinformation and thus for the globalization ofdemand. Global marketing and attempts toestablish global brand names have increased globaladvertising expenditures from USD 39 billion in1950 to USD 256 billion in 1990. This is threetimes faster than the growth in trade. Informationtechnologies make possible the globalization ofsupplyby facilitating communications within andbetween firms. The ever-shorter life cycle ofproducts forces companies to expand their marketshare in order to recover the growing costs andrisks of research and development (R&D). Thisleads to a globalization of competition, to whichcompanies respond through networking, mergers,take-overs and the creation of consortia.

In the process, globalization comes to mean morethan simply growth in international trade and agrowing role for trans-national companies (TNCs),but also a new system of industrial organization,which is given such names as ‘flexiblespecialization or accumulation’, ‘leanmanufacturing’, and ‘just-in-time capitalism’. Theshift from standardized mass production to flexibleproduction systems is often characterized as a shiftfrom Fordism to post-Fordism. This meansdifferent principles underlying the way thatproduction, labour and enterprises are organized,and different concepts of location and marketing.While these changes are taking place primarily inthe advanced economies, their effects havewidespread ramifications and affect theinternational division of labour. They are related tothe trend, evident since the 1980s, towardseconomic deregulation and liberalization, which inturn has led to informalization.

Technological changes and their ramifications helpto create the impression that globalization isinevitable and unstoppable. The reality underlying

Part I. Overview of the scientific debate on globalization4

13

4. This part of the report wasprepared by dr J. NederveenPieterse of the Institute of SocialStudies, The Hague. Selectedreferences for this part are inAnnex 2.

Table 1. Consensus and controversy in relation to

globalization

Issues on which there is consensus

• Globalization is driven by technological change,

especially ICT.

• Globalization involves the reconfiguration of

states.

• Globalization goes together with regionalization.

• Globalization is uneven.

Controversial issues

• Is globalization essentially economic or

multidimensional?

• Does globalization exist or is it rhetoric,

‘globaloney’?

• Globalization and neoliberalism

• Cultural implications of globalization

this is that globalization is a macro-economicphenomenon that is driven by micro-economicforces, i.e. at the level of firms. The opportunitiesthat new technologies provide apply not merely toTNCs but also to small and medium-size firms.

Globalization thus coincides with major changes inthe international economic landscape, all of whichare intertwined. Accelerated globalization comes ina package together with informatization,flexibilization, and deregulation. The combinedeffect gives the changes associated withglobalization their dramatic character. In a way,globalization serves as a convenient cover term forall these changes, but it is actually inadequate.Literally speaking, ‘globalization’ refers to aprocess defined in terms of space. It points up thefact that effects (precisely of what is not specified)are felt on a worldwide scale. It can only signal thewider changes that are also involved.

Globalization involves the reconfiguration ofstates and goes together with regionalization

Earlier analyses spoke of the ‘retreat’ and ‘erosion’of states (Strange 1996). In the radical view,globalization means the onset of the borderlessworld (Ohmae 1992), the end of the nation-stateand the formation of the region-state (Ohmae1995). These arguments have been superseded bymore nuanced views (e.g. Boyer and Drache 1996,Mann 1997). Thus states may now be leaner butthey are also more active, and in some areasassume greater responsibilities (Griffin and Khan1992). Probably what consensus exists could beformulated in the twin processes of a general trendtowards the pooling of sovereignty at differentlevels (regional, international, supranational),combined with a shift from government togovernance at all levels.

From the sociological point of view, globalizationsince the 19th century has taken the form of agrowing predominance of nation-states (Robertson1992, Featherstone 1990). Between 1840 and 1960,nation-states were the leading form of politicalorganization around the world. Starting in the1960s, regionalization entered the picture as anincreasingly significant dynamic (as in theEuropean Community). Since then state authorityhas been ‘leaking upwards’ through aninternational and supranational pooling ofsovereignty, a process that is also referred to as ‘theinternationalization of states’. State authority hasalso been ‘leaking downwards’. If the latterhappens in a controlled fashion it is referred to as

‘decentralization’ or ‘devolution’. If it happens inan uncontrolled fashion, it is termed ‘ethnic orregional conflict’ and results in fragmentation andpossibly state disintegration and collapse. The‘internationalization of the state’ refers to theblurring of boundaries between ‘international’ and‘domestic’ politics (producing ‘intermestic’politics). A general account of the politicalimplications of globalization is the erosion ofboundaries and the growth of cross-borderactivities, economic and otherwise. If between1840 and 1960 the political form of globalizationhas been the nation-state, presently the leadingform of globalization is regionalization (for ageneral account see Oman 1994). Regionalizationtakes different forms, ranging from regionalcustoms unions (such as AFTA), free market zones(such as NAFTA, APEC, Mercosur, SAARC, andmany others), and regional security alliances(ASEAN), all the way to the deepinstitutionalization of the European Union.

According to one view, we are now witnessing theformation of regional trade blocs along withregional neomercantilism, or the ‘regionalization ofcompetition’ (e.g. Morrison, Ricks and Ross 1991).As a general scenario this does not seem likely,however, since trade, capital flows, marketing andtechnological interdependence generally cut acrossregional boundaries. A different perspective is toview regional formations as anchors around whichperipheries align – with Japan and China asanchors for East and Southeast Asia; NorthAmerica as anchor for Latin America; and the EUas anchor for Eastern Europe, the SouthernMediterranean and Africa (Stallings 1995). This isa spatial perspective on regional organization; atemporal perspective is to view regionalism as astepping-stone towards growing multilateralism andeventually global governance (e.g. Group of Lisbon1995).

Globalization is uneven Like such earlier notions as internationalization andinterdependence, globalization does not refer to aglobal, level playing field or to symmetric andequal international relations. Contemporaryglobalization is largely confined to the ‘Triad’ ofNorth America, Europe and Japan. The distributionof income and wealth remains extremely unequal:14 per cent of the world’s population accounted for80 per cent of investment flows in the period 1980-91 and for 70 per cent of world trade in 1992 (Hirstand Thompson 1996: 15). This situation is capturedunder headings such as ‘Triadization’ or ‘truncated

I. Overview of the scientific debate on globalization

14

globalization’, which is confined to the ‘interlinkedeconomies’. During the past few decades theNorth-South development gap has widened inseveral respects. At the same time, the developmentgap between advanced economies and newlyindustrializing countries has narrowed, but the gapbetween these and the least developed countries hasbecome wider. Extrapolating from the earlierterminology of uneven development, the presentsituation may be described as combined and unevenglobalization.

I.3 Controversial issues The controversies over globalization concernquestions that are both more fundamental – what isglobalization and how important is it? – and more‘downstream’ – i.e., questions that concern thepolitics, shape and direction of globalization.Disputes about the fundamentals of globalizationare intertwined with the everyday politics ofglobalization. Another controversy, which isimplicit rather than explicit, is related toquantitative versus qualitative perspectives onglobalization. While there is a general awarenessthat globalization is a multidimensional, complexprocess, many economists view globalizationessentially as an economic phenomenon which canbe measured statistically. Another dispute concernsthe cultural ramifications of globalization.

Is globalization essentially economic or is itmultidimensional?

There is a widespread but also rather vagueunderstanding that globalization refers to complex,multifaceted and multilayered processes. At timesattempts are made to distinguish (and combine)different dimensions of and approaches toglobalization (Robertson 1992), but usually thishappens in an add-on fashion (Waters 1996) that istoo casual to significantly change theunderstanding of what globalization is. Economic,political, cultural and social dynamics are notsimply different facets of a single ‘globalization’,but each of the social sciences has its ownconceptualization of globalization (NederveenPieterse 1995).

Economic globalization is at times narrowlyreferred to as ‘corporate globalism’ whileglobalization in the sphere of values is termed‘global humanism’ (Gurtov 1994). Globalization inpolitics is viewed as an extension ofmultilateralism, but also as ‘post-internationalpolitics’, or the entry of non-state actors intointernational politics (Rosenau 1990). Another

distinction is drawn between globalization ‘fromabove’ and ‘from below’ (Falk 1994, 1999). Othersdistinguish between globalization as an objective orempirical process of economic and politicalintegration, and globalization as a subjectiveprocess unfolding in consciousness, i.e. thecollective awareness of growing globalinterconnectedness (Robertson 1992). None ofthese terms are particularly precise or necessarilypertinent, but what matters is the general awarenessof globalization as a multifaceted, layered process.Globalization understood in this way wouldresemble a post-cubist painting more strongly thanit would resemble either the sets of internationaltrade statistics compiled by economists or thesimple, gung-ho accounts published in businessmanagement magazines.

Among economists, the dominant way of thinkingis to reduce globalization to trade, investment andfinancial statistics. These constitute ‘objective’ or‘real’ globalization, and all the rest is myth orfantasy (e.g. Krugman 1996, Sachs 1998). Thisapproach can be used either to delimit globalizationor to deny its occurrence or importance (Hirst andThompson 1996). More complex assessments ofglobalization prevail in the field of internationalpolitical economy (e.g. Milner 1998).

This is an example of how different disciplines seephenomena differently, with each social scienceseeing itself as ‘owning’ globalization andpreferring its own disciplinary angle. On the whole,sociological, political and cultural perspectives tendto involve complex understandings of globalizationand to be more inclusive than economicperspectives. The various disciplines seeglobalization taking place in different arenas, withdifferent actors, and on widely varying timescales(see Table 2 on page 16). Their definitions ofglobalization are of course also profoundlydifferent (see Table 3 on page 17).

This could be expanded with the addition of otherperspectives on globalization. In geography, forexample, key themes are the relativization ofdistance and the dialectical relationship betweenglobalization and localization. In philosophy, keythemes are planetary ethics, universal morality, andglobal reflexivity. In ecology, major themes areglobal risk, ‘spaceship earth’ and the image of theblue sphere.


15

Does globalization exist and if so, how can weevaluate it?

Whether globalization actually exists or is a mythor exaggerated rhetoric is a familiar dispute. Hirstand Thompson (1996) criticize what they call‘globalization rhetoric’ or ‘globaloney’ on severalgrounds. Their key argument is that before 1914 theworld economy was more internationalized than atpresent. The period of the new imperialism andbelle époque,1870-1914, was shaped by territorialimperialism. At that time western countriescontrolled as much as 96 percent of the earth’ssurface; no wonder that economies at the time seemhighly internationalized and open. But this concealswhat is distinctive about contemporaryglobalization: that it is not territorial andimperialist (in the classic sense). Hirst andThompson further argue that the number of genuineTNCs (as opposed to MNCs, which are national

corporations with an international reach) is small.The rejoinder is that these are trend-setters inproduction. Moreover, although perhaps there arenot so many genuine TNCs, foreign directinvestment has definitely increased on a spectacularscale. Hirst and Thompson are concerned witheconomic globalization, but obviously there ismuch more to globalization – technological,political, social, cultural dimensions andconfigurations such as global civil society. Theentire non-economic literature on globalization ispassed over in their argument, even the literature ontechnology. Both prior to 1914 and since that timethere have been major technological changes (froma transportation revolution to a communicationrevolution) which have made higher levels ofeconomic internationalization both possible andnecessary (Henderson 1993).

We can distinguish a broad spectrum of positionson globalization. Table 4 summarizes the views ofvarious authors in terms of analysis, evaluation andpolicy.

Globalization and neoliberalismGlobalization since the 1980s, or acceleratedglobalization, has coincided with the rise ofneoliberalism: that is, open market policies and aminimal role for the state in the economy. TheStabilization and Structural AdjustmentProgrammes imposed by the IMF and the WorldBank as part of the ‘Washington consensus’ haveshaped the face of contemporary globalization. TheWorld Trade Organization (WTO) is the mostrecent new instrument of policies of liberalizationand deregulation. How controversial these policiesare was demonstrated by the battle of Seattle. Thefinancial crises in Mexico, East and Southeast Asia,Russia and Latin America have also shown thefrailty of the global financial system and have castdoubt on the idea that the market alone can do agood job of directing economies. Cracks have beenappearing in the ‘Washington consensus’. In theSouth, globalization has been widely identifiedwith the policies of the Washington consensus,even though this concerns the present form and notthe wider trendof globalization.

Globalization and cultureGlobalization, or the trend of growing world-wideinterconnectedness, is accompanied by severalconflicting notions about cultural difference.A growing sensitivity to cultural differencescoincides with a perception of the world ‘becomingsmaller’ and a notion that cultural differences are


16

Table 2. Globalization according to different social science disciplines

Disciplines Period Agency, domain Keywords

Economics 1970s> MNCs, banks, technologies Global corporation,

world product,

global capitalism

Cultural studies 1970s> Mass media, advertising Global village,

CNN world,

McDonaldization,

Jihad vs. McWorld,

hybridization

Political science, 1980s> Internationalization of the Competitor states. Post-

International state. Social movements, international politics.

Relations INGOs Global civil society.

Sociology 1800s> Modernity Capitalism,

industrialization,

urbanization,

nation states, etc.

Political economy, 1500s> Modern capitalism World market

Marxism

History, 5000 BC> Cross-cultural trade, Global flows,

anthropology technologies, world religions. global ecumene.

Evolution. Widening scale of

cooperation

Biology Integration of ecosystems Global ecology

(Adapted from Nederveen Pieterse 1995.)

disappearing. The growing awareness of culturaldifferences is part of the general cultural trendtowards greater self-awareness that characterizesthe modern era. It is interesting to note how thenotion of cultural difference itself has changed. Itused to focus on national differences, as in thefamiliar discussions of national character. Nowdifferences along other lines have come to theforeground as discussion has shifted to ethnic and

religious movements, minority rights, indigenouspeoples, identity politics and gender.

The present debate on globalization and cultureinvolves fundamentally different perspectives basedon profoundly different premises regarding themeaning of cultural difference. This generatesdramatic differences in the way the ramifications ofglobalization are diagnosed.

According to a familiar argument, we are presentlyexperiencing a ‘clash of civilizations’ (Huntington1996). This is matched by pessimistic views ofgrowing ethnic conflict (Moynihan 1993, Kaplan1996). In this view, cultural difference is regardedas immutable and as generating rivalry and conflict.At the same time there is a widespreadunderstanding that growing global interdependenceand interconnectedness can lead to increasingcultural standardization and uniformity, as in theglobal sweep of consumerism, media andadvertising. This vision is summarized in the word‘McDonaldization’ (Ritzer 1993) and is an updatedversion of the 1970s idea of ‘Coca Colonization’. Athird position, altogether different from both thesemodels of intercultural relations, is the view thatwhat is taking place is a process of cultural mixingor hybridization across locations and identities(Appadurai 1996). These views involve threeperspectives on cultural difference: culturaldifferentialism or lasting difference, culturalconvergence or growing sameness, and culturalhybridization or ongoing mixing.

Each paradigm views globalization from aparticular angle. 1. According to culturaldifferentialism, globalization is only a superficialphenomenon. The real dynamic is regionalization,or the formation of regional blocs which tend tocorrespond with ‘civilizational’ clusters. In thisview the future of globalization is interregionalrivalry. 2. According to the convergence approach,contemporary globalization is westernization orAmericanization writ large, a fulfillment ininstallments of the classical imperial thesis and themodernization-convergence thesis. 3. According tothe mixing approach, the outcome of globalizationprocesses is open-ended, and current globalizationis as much a process of easternization as ofwesternization, as well as of many supranationalinfluences and processes.


17

Table 3. Definitions of globalization

Discipline Definitions Source

Economics ‘similarity of economic conditions and policies across

national boundaries ...’ Gray (1993: 38)

‘accelerated movement across national and regional

barriers of economic ‘goods’, i.e. people, products,

capital, especially intangible forms of capital

(technology, control of assets)’ Oman (1993: 56)

Sociology ‘Globalization …refers both to the compression of

the world and the intensification of consciousness

of the world as a whole.’ Robertson (1992: 8)

‘the intensification of world-wide social relations

which link distant localities in such a way that local

happenings are shaped by events occurring many

miles away and vice versa.’ Giddens (1990: 64)

‘A social process in which the constraints of

geography on social and cultural arrangements

recede and in which people are increasingly aware

that they are receding’ Waters (1995: 3)

History ‘Globalization is a long-term historical process of

growing world-wide interconnectedness.’ Nederveen Pieterse

(1995)

Table 4. Positions on globalization

Analysis Evaluation Policy Sources

Does not exist National politics, regionalism Hirst and Thompson

Powerful trend Positive Borderless world Ohmae

Powerful trend Negative New protectionism, localism Hines, IFG

Powerful trend Negative Silicon imperialism: Sivanandan, S Amin,

control capitalism McMichael

Powerful system Both Golden Arches Thomas Friedman

Dialectical Both Strategic, flexible Griffin and Khan

These different views find adherents in each settingand the dispute is echoed in each arena. Arguably,cultural self-understanding and empirical evidenceconfirm the third perspective more than the others.In Asia, ideas of fusion (e.g. western technologywith eastern values) are a dominant motif (cf.Rashid 1997). In Latin America and the Caribbean,creolization and métissage are familiar self-understandings . In Africa, recombinations of localand foreign practices are common (e.g. Gurnah1997). But the imprint of other paradigms runsdeep, disputes over identity and meaning areubiquitous, and there is disagreement over themeaning and dynamics of hybridity.


18

RAWOO gathered information in several ways. Inorder to gain insight into the debate aboutglobalization in the South and find out what themain issues are, RAWOO sponsored workshops onglobalization in Tanzania and Bolivia.5 Earlier,RAWOO had commissioned two reviews ofscientific publications on globalization produced incountries of the South. The RAWOO Secretariatparticipated in a congress of rural sociologists fromall over Latin America in Mexico and collectedfurther material from Southern scientists throughvarious sources. The information thus gathered ispresented in the sections that follow.

II.1 The economic, socio-political andcultural dimensions of globalization inthe South

The economic dimensionBoth Tanzania and Bolivia opened up theireconomies in the mid-1980s in the hope that thiswould attract foreign trade and investment, whichin turn would stimulate indigenous growth. But inthe more than ten years since the economies openedup, only the sectors which have clear potential onglobal markets (mining, natural gas, certain exportcrops) or offer quick benefits have attracted foreigninvestment. Moreover, it turns out that the activitiesof the few foreign firms which have establishedthemselves in Tanzania and Bolivia have not hadany catalytic effect. Indigenous growth is alsodisappointing.

In the discussions, a number of possibleexplanations were given for this state of affairs:

Internal factors:• High transaction costs resulting from factors

such as poor infrastructure, erratic availability ofpower and water, unstable and inconsistentgovernment policies, insecurity of contracts,bureaucratic procedures, and corruption. Thesemake investment unattractive.

• Large enterprises operate at a level of technologydifferent from that of medium-sized, small andmicro-size enterprises. This impedes their abilityto benefit from each other.

• Lack of entrepreneurial capacity and no desire tomodernize.

• Shortage of skilled labour in combination withproblems of brain-drain.

• Lack of business skills for meeting therequirements of export markets in terms ofmarketing, packaging, changing tastes, etc.

• In the case of Tanzania, the country’s knowledgebase is actually deteriorating, with schoolenrolment going down, and schools anduniversities starved of funding.

External factors:• The continued existence of trade barriers which

keep Southern products off of Northern markets.• Debt makes Tanzania and Bolivia very dependent

on foreign creditors. They are therefore not freeto decide their own economic policies.

• Barriers to the free flow of labour to Northerncountries. More émigrés would mean moreremittances, a substantial source of income formany countries even now.

• Because Southern countries lack negotiatingpower, regulations decided by such multilateralinstitutions as the World Trade Organization arenot favourable to them.

Workshop participants concluded that both of theircountries continue to rely mainly on the export ofprimary goods. These exports are growing at amuch slower rate than the general average forglobal exports. This, combined with deterioratingterms of trade for primary products, means thattheir share of global trade is becoming increasinglyinsignificant. With a growing trade deficit and lowrates of savings and internal revenue, both Boliviaand Tanzania are forced to rely heavily on aid.Participants in Bolivia pointed out that a two-speedeconomy is becoming entrenched. A small, foreign-dominated, modern economy operates alongsidethe locally owned economy in which the vastmajority of the population lives and works. In termsof their ability to negotiate global economic terms,there is a huge difference between these sectors.The tiny modern sector benefits from globalization,while the rest of the economy is in stagnation.

The workshop in Bolivia and in particular thecongress in Mexico discussed the alarming rate atwhich peasant agriculture is becoming more andmore difficult to maintain. This is a result of thestructural adjustment policies. All kinds of serviceswhich the government once provided for thepeasant sector (government price controls,extension services, subsidized credit) have beenwithdrawn and special land tenure arrangements forpeasants have been abolished. Without this support,many peasants cannot subsist and they aremigrating to the cities temporarily or permanentlyin search of income.

Part II. Globalization in Tanzania and Bolivia

19

5. For reports of the workshops, see Annexes 3 and 4 of thisdocument. The workshops’proceedings are being prepared bythe organizers of the workshopsfor publication in Tanzania andBolivia.

As a consequence of the constraints describedabove, the Tanzanian and Bolivian economies arenot capable of generating sufficient employment,which means there is considerable unemploymentand underemployment.

In Bolivia, a lack of employment in combinationwith the liberalization of the labour market (from1985) has caused labour conditions to deteriorate.Wages have fallen or stood still; there is morecasual labour; working days are longer; and morework is subcontracted or done at home withoutsocial benefits. Liberalization of the labour marketwas intended as a way of reducing labour costs andmaking Bolivian industry more profitable. But ithas not led to the growth in productive investmentwhich was expected.6

With so much underemployment andunemployment, many people try their luck asmicro-entrepreneurs in the informal sector. InTanzania, according to workshop participants, therehave been positive developments in this area, withmany successful micro-entrepreneurs settingexamples for others to follow. The workshopconcluded that in Bolivia, however, productivity inthe informal sector has not kept pace with thegrowing numbers, with the effect that per capitaincomes have gone down. This impliesoverexploitation of the labour force in the informalsector, with women and young people being forcedinto the lowest-paying activities.

Underemployment and unemployment haveprompted many Bolivians to emigrate to Brazil,Argentina and the USA. In both Bolivia andTanzania, the emigration of highly educated people(‘brain-drain’) is seen as a serious problem.

The workshops concluded that the gap betweenrich and poor in society is widening. A largemajority of Tanzanians and Bolivians do not benefitat all from their country’s integration into theglobal economy. Access to land and capital, toregular employment, and to social security,education, health care and housing has beenreduced instead of increased. According to theworkshop participants, this leads to persistentpoverty and the exclusion of large numbers ofpeople. Participants in the Congress of RuralSociologists in Mexico feared that in the case ofLatin America, there might soon be starvation inthe countryside. In many areas, resistancemovements have emerged, such as the Zapatistas in

Mexico and the Movement of Workers withoutLand in Brazil.

The RAWOO survey revealed that the economicand political literature on globalization producedby ‘Southern’ scientists similarly sees globalizationas leading towards more inequity and polarization,and as destructive to the social and political fabric.

Both workshops examined the option of regionalcooperation (with neighbouring countries). Thisbrings at least two advantages: larger markets andthe possibility of joining together to bargain withother blocs and with organizations such as theWorld Trade Organization and the European Union.Workshop participants in Tanzania agreed thatTanzania should join the Southern AfricanDevelopment Community (SADC). Bolivia isalready a member of the Andean Community(CAN, with Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela andColombia) and an associate of Mercosur (withBrazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay). At thesame time, participants in both workshopsexpressed doubt about the ability of theirentrepreneurs to compete with counterparts in suchneighbouring countries as Kenya and Uganda andBrazil and Argentina, where the business sectorsare much more developed.

The socio-political (governance) dimension From a socio-political point of view, bothworkshops gave ample attention to the situation ofthe state in a globalizing world. Economicliberalization is seen as an important phenomenonconnected with globalization. As part of theliberalization process, both Bolivia and Tanzaniahave been following structural adjustment policiessince the mid-1980s. The result is that ‘[a] degreeof macroeconomic balance has been achieved, butat the cost of restricting government expendituresbelow levels needed to maintain governmentcapacity and basic infrastructure.’7 Participants inthe workshop in Bolivia indicated that because offoreign debt8 and dependence on externalresources,9 the state has lost some of its capacityfor strategic management and development. In linewith the policies of lender agencies, the state isconcentrating on controlling wages and making thelabour market more flexible. Trade union activity issuppressed to this end. Achieving economic growthis the sole objective.

Organizations which were once capable ofcollective action and interaction with the state areweak because their area of competence has lost

II. Globalization in Tanzania and Bolivia

20

6. Silvia Escóbar de Pabón, paper written for the Bolivia workshop,section 3.1

7. Brian Van Arkadie, paperwritten for the Tanzania workshop,p. 22.

8. Debt repayment stands at 20%of the annual budget.

9. Aid is Bolivia’s largest source offoreign currency at 12% of totalearnings.

significance. For example, liberalization of thelabour market has eroded the power of tradeunions. Peasant organizations have lost powerbecause the government has rescinded specialmeasures for the peasant sector, as mentionedabove.

In Tanzania, one of the problems mentioned in thecontext of restricted government expenditure is thefact that the salaries of government employees havenot been adjusted for inflation. This means thatgovernment employees can no longer live on theirsalaries and have to look for additional income. Asa result, corruption has increased sharply. Many ofthe most talented civil servants are leaving publicservice for work with donor agencies or abroad.

Health care and education have been starved ofgovernment funding and have subsequentlydeteriorated. A drop in educational quality has hadmany far-reaching consequences. In Tanzania,parents send their children abroad for education,for example, which must be paid for in foreigncurrency. Another implication is that with fewerchildren educated properly, Tanzania and Boliviaare even less prepared for the greater dependenceon knowledge which globalization is requiring oftheir economies.

In Bolivia the criminal economy – trade in coca – isa growing problem. On a smaller scale, the same istrue in Tanzania, where precious stones are minedillegally and protected animals are exploitedcommercially. In both countries, the state is unableto enforce the law properly. Traders in theseproducts are also finding it easier and easier to gainaccess to global markets.

The cultural dimensionIn Tanzania workshop participants spoke of whatthey called ‘cultural confusion’, which is seen as aconsequence of abrupt changes in society that arerelated to globalization. In this confusion, manypeople seek refuge either in movements whichpromise better times when resources will not haveto be shared with other ethnic groups, or in thefundamentalist branches of global religions, withtheir promise of salvation for true believers.10 Thistrend is reinforced by activities of Christianreligious organizations in the West and Muslimreligious organizations in the Middle East whichare making good use of the new opportunitiescreated by satellite media and less governmentcontrol in order to spread their message. Ethnic andreligious conflict lies around the corner.

At the workshop in Bolivia, it was said that ‘theknowledge maps that helped us fix horizons andselect possible routes have been destroyed.’11

In the rapidly growing cities of Bolivia and othercountries of Latin America, many social problemsare resulting in high rates of crime and violence,including domestic violence. These problems arelargely due to the uncertainties of life in theinformal sector. Migration has broken down manymechanisms of social cohesion which operated inthe closely-knit communities from which thepeople came. This is exacerbated by the need forindigenous people to give up part of their culturalheritage in order to adapt to new circumstances inthe urban centres.

The state’s shrinking role in cultural developmenthas both positive and negative effects. A positiveeffect in the case of the indigenous peoples of LatinAmerica is that they now have more possibilitiesfor maintaining their own culture. In Bolivia, forexample, radio stations have emerged whichbroadcast in Aymara, Quechua and otherindigenous languages. But at the same time,participants in the Tanzanian workshop pointed outthat the nation-building policy of bringing togetherchildren of different ethnic groups in state boardingschools is no longer affordable. This policy hadbeen one of the cornerstones of Tanzania’ssuccessful attempts at ethnic integration.

Both the literature and the Tanzanian workshopdenounced the fact that because of Africa’s historyof foreign domination – in the period of slavery, thecolonial period, and the Cold War period – Africanreality has always been interpreted in foreignterms. The ‘developmentalist model’ has givenundue emphasis to aspects of the modern state andhas neglected indigenous processes of absorbing,‘creolizing’ or rejecting what comes from outside.There is a danger that with all the rapid andprofound changes caused by globalization, the richcultural heritage of Africa is again not being tappedfor solutions. Resources for autonomous Africanintellectual work – academic, philosophical andartistic – are very limited.

A project in Kenya, which examines traditionalways of dealing with conflict between ethnicgroups, provides an example of how innovativesolutions for problems caused by globalization canbe derived from traditional African culture. Theproject is aimed at enhancing local people’s interestin their own peace-making traditions.


21

10. Penina Mlama, ‘Local Perspectives of Globalization: TheCultural Domain of Globalization’,paper written for the Tanzaniaworkshop.

11. ‘The Effects of Globalization inBolivia’, Report on theInternational Workshop, SantaCruz de la Sierra, 29-30September 1999, p. 7 (Annex 4).

The ecological dimensionAlthough the workshops did not specificallydiscuss the impact of globalization on theenvironment, a paper on this subject prepared inTanzania after the workshop12 draws attention to thelink between globalization and the rapid depletionof natural resources and deterioration of theenvironment. The paper sees globalization also asthe cause of the growing involvement of criminalsin new forms of ‘natural resources management’.It is most likely due to liberalization thatdeforestation in Tanzania is taking place at sixtimes the average global rate. Grazing land isdeteriorating rapidly. The mining sector is causingconsiderable environmental degradation and thelargely uncontrolled trade in timber and exoticanimals is a threat to biodiversity. In urban areas,the problems of water pollution and solid wastedisposal are being addressed in an unsatisfactoryway.

II.2 Globalization opportunities forthe South: what the workshopsrecommend

II.2.1 Workshop recommendationsconcerning globalization policies

There was consensus in the workshops that despitethe imbalance it creates, globalization is here tostay. Countries like Tanzania and Bolivia willsimply have to develop strategies for correcting theimbalance. Such strategies need to be based on abroad vision of what globalization means and howeach country can deal with it. A new ‘mind set’ isneeded which does not merely accept the currentorthodoxy regarding the policies that developingcountries must follow, but rather takes up thechallenge to forge an alternative economic andsocial model. This would be a model of phased andcontrolled integration, in contrast to the currentunconditional opening-up to the globalizationprocess, which creates more victims than countrieslike Tanzania and Bolivia can afford. Bothworkshops concluded that there is a need to discussthe relationship between globalization and(neoliberal) structural adjustment policies.Workshop participants in Bolivia concluded thatmarket forces cannot be trusted to bring about theeconomic transformation that would make theBolivian economy competitive in world markets.They were of the opinion that the neo-liberalpolicies adopted by the government should bemodified. Similar voices were heard in Tanzania.

Both workshops discussed the industrial policies

required in this era of globalization. In Tanzania,participants maintained that Tanzania shoulddevelop its own strong industrial sector. Otherparticipants expressed their doubts about thefeasibility of such a drive in view of the fact thatTanzania at present is not in a position to give anascent industrial sector any state protection. InBolivia participants pointed out that technologicaland organizational innovations related toproduction are necessary to make local industrycapable of competing in the global market. Thestate should play a role in helping Bolivian industryto introduce these innovations.

In both workshops participants recommendedtaking a closer look at sectors and individualentrepreneurs that have been successful in theglobal marketplace, and analyzing the factorswhich have contributed to their success. Bolivianparticipants said that these models could help tocreate the conditions needed not only forcompetitiveness and participation in internationalmarkets, but also for proper jobs and the improveddevelopment of human resources.

Participants in both workshops were aware that anysuccess competing in the global market requiresupgrading the skills of the workforce.

The workshops called on the various nationalstakeholders – especially government, but also theprivate sector and NGOs – to intervene moreproactively in the process of dealing withglobalization.

Participants in the workshop in Bolivia concludedthat the Bolivian state is not weak when it comes toprotecting the interests of industry or controllingthe labour market. ‘It can therefore be inferred thatthere is space for formulating and managing publicpolicies based on national agendas.’13

The consensus among participants in bothworkshops was that the state should definitely playa role similar to the role of the state in East Asiancountries, which has been a prominent factor in therapid development of these countries.

Participants indicated that the state should be mademore competent to:• conduct better negotiations with international

organizations such as the WTO and withmultinational corporations;

• create a market environment conducive to theright kind of investment. This means, among


22

12. Idris S Kikula & Aida Kiangi, ‘Local Perspectives OnGlobalization: The NaturalResources Domain in Tanzania’,paper prepared in the context ofthe workshop in Tanzania.


other things, an adequate tax structure, goodinfrastructure, and consultancy services fornascent national industries.

There was consensus in Tanzania that the stateshould invest heavily in education and training.Creating an adequate incentive structure shouldstop brain-drain. Ways should be found to make useof talented Tanzanians living overseas.

The workshops identified a need to rethink the roleof the state as a public body. The state should besupported by the people and responsive to thepeople, and strive to eliminate corruption. TheBolivian workshop concluded that the state’s publicroles require a different ‘institutionality’:modifications in the structure of state institutionsand in the mechanisms for cooperating withsociety. This is necessary if the state is to developpolicies that respond to the community’s needs andcontribute to good governance.

As mentioned above, both workshops saw a needfor more regional cooperation (with neighbouringcountries) in order to create larger markets andfacilitate collective bargaining with other blocs andwith organizations such as the World TradeOrganization and the European Union. Specifically,Tanzania should join forces with the SouthernAfrican Development Community (SADC), andBolivia with the Andean Community (CAN, withPeru, Ecuador, Venezuela and Colombia) and/orMercosur (with Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay andUruguay).

The challenge put forward by the workshops willbe to encourage the formation of a society that cancope with globalization but is still based onprinciples which are supported by local people inaccordance with their own behavioural patterns,attitudes, beliefs and values. This would imply thepromotion of welcome aspects of both ‘modernity’and ‘tradition’. Institutions with a potential role inthis area should be strengthened: e.g., schools,mass media, religious organizations, and the artsector.

Another challenge is to encourage themulticulturalism and cultural integration that willhelp to avoid ethnic strife. Through the educationsystem, among other things, the state clearly has arole to play in general cultural policy as well as inpromoting cultural integration.

II.2.2 Workshop recommendationsconcerning globalization research

As regards appropriate ways of applying researchto globalization policies, the workshopsrecommended the following.

It is essential to adopt multidisciplinary approachesbecause of the multifaceted nature of globalization,in which economic and political factors interactwith cultural and social factors.

Empirical work is indispensable for exploring theconcrete effects of globalization on differentsectors, societal groups and regions. A combinationof fundamental and applied research is required ifnew understanding and practical solutions are to befound. There should be a link between theoreticalorientations and long-term strategic choices.

In order to be relevant for policy-making, researchwill have to be done in consultation with end-usersand policy-makers. It will have to contribute ‘topublic awareness, to the formulation of publicagendas and to the debate between social actorsand policy-makers.’14 Research should also haverelevance to development at the local, regional andnational levels.

The workshop in Bolivia named a number of actorsas meriting priority for research on the localresponse to globalization: small rural producers,small urban producers, the manufacturing industry,the export manufacturing sector, privatized(formerly state-owned) industries, and women andyouth and their organizations. In the view of theBolivians, research on these actors will yieldinsight into ‘what possibilities and constraints boththe backward sectors and the dynamic sectors havefor linking up with the globalization process, takingthe economic and political dimensions intoaccount.’15

For a proper understanding of the effects ofglobalization in Bolivia and Tanzania, research onlocal processes cannot ignore the interactionbetween processes at all levels: local, provincial,national, regional (Sub-Saharan Africa and LatinAmerica) and global. Researchers in the South‘should gain access to approaches and concepts ofinterpretation produced within the framework ofother realities.’16 They should acquireunderstanding of the changes taking place aroundthe world, and not just consider how these affecttheir own countries. They need to know how themechanisms for making policy decisions function


23

14. ‘The Effects of Globalization in Bolivia’, Report on theInternational Workshop, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, 29-30 September 1999, p. 11 (Annex 4).

15. Ibidem

16. ‘The Effects of Globalization in Bolivia’, Report on theInternational Workshop, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, 29-30 September 1999, p. 9 (Annex 4).

in the US and Europe, and not just in their owncountries. ‘Successful participation in the globaleconomy requires some understanding of itsworking and of the successes and failures ofstrategies adopted by other nations.’17

II.2.3 Workshop recommendationsfor follow-up

The participants made a number ofrecommendations for following up the workshops.

A strong sense of ownership and the expression ofa need for capacity development prompted theworkshop participants to urge that the dialoguestarted by the RAWOO-sponsored workshops becontinued. In both Tanzania and Bolivia concretesteps have already been taken in this direction.

In Tanzania the workshop led to the establishmentof a national working group on globalization whichwill design a strategy for linking a research agendato the process of national strategy development.Activities to be undertaken by central government,NGOs and other bodies were recommended forconsideration as well.

In Bolivia a similar proposal was made,emphasizing the need for partnerships betweenNGOs and the academic community. Workshopparticipants were encouraged to have the researchagenda formulated by the workshop incorporatedinto the agendas of the research centres which theyrepresented. CEDLA, the organizer of theworkshop, was advised to continue to hold similarevents based on the analysis of concrete problems.It was also suggested that a survey be conducted ofthe institutions working on the issue ofglobalization in Latin America. These could bebrought together in a network once a researchprogramme has taken shape. The possibilitiesoffered by the new electronic media will greatlyfacilitate this kind of cooperation.

In the evaluation of the workshops it was pointedout that the gender dimension and theenvironmental dimension of globalization had notyet received enough attention. This should becorrected in the follow-up.18

Both workshops asked RAWOO to help ensure thatthe reflection on globalization which had been setin motion in Tanzania and Bolivia can becontinued. The participants had found it highlyrelevant.


24

17. Brian Van Arkadie, ‘Globalisation and the East AfricanEconomies: an OverallPerspective’, paper prepared forthe workshop in Tanzania, p. 27.

18. Report on the Workshop‘Local Perspectives onGlobalization’, Dar es Salaam,Tanzania, 10-11 September 1998,p. 8 (Annex 3) and ‘The Effects ofGlobalization in Bolivia’, Report onthe International Workshop, SantaCruz de la Sierra, 29-30September 1999, p. 12 (Annex 4).

III.1 Towards a programme ofresearch on the local response toglobalization in developing countries

The workshops in Tanzania and Bolivia as well asthe congress in Mexico and the ‘Southern’scientific literature all point out that there are veryfundamental problems to be addressed inconnection with globalization. Tanzania andBolivia, like other countries, have openedthemselves up to globalization by adopting open-border policies and by restricting governmentintervention. But, as the workshops conclude (seeII.1 above), this is generally bringing more coststhan gains. For the large majority of people, optionshave been drastically reduced. Very few people arebenefiting from opportunities created byglobalization.

In the discussions there was a consensus thatglobalization is here to stay in spite of theimbalance it creates. Strategies must therefore bedeveloped to correct the imbalance.19

Globalization is a process which the workshopparticipants see as shaping the present and future ofBolivia and Tanzania without Bolivians orTanzanians being able to make any conscious,collective decisions about it. The participants wantto see the various national stakeholders – especiallygovernment, but also the private sector and NGOs –intervene more proactively in the globalizationprocess.

Due to the complexities involved, however,workshop participants feel that a major researcheffort is needed to support this intervention.

RAWOO basically endorses the conclusions of theworkshops, although it thinks globalization couldoffer more opportunities than the workshops seemto imply. West Africa, for example, has a numberof globalization success stories in both economic20

and cultural areas. RAWOO acknowledges thatthere is a need for research which can helpdeveloping countries to cope with globalization.

Below is the outline of a research programme insupport of policy-making aimed at achieving thebest possible local response to globalization.Section III.1.1 discusses options for focusing theprogramme on certain topics, while section III.1.2discusses the methodological and organizationalrequirements for a programme that is based on theneeds of developing countries. Section III.2describes the steps to be taken during the

programme-development phase that will precedethe programme.

III.1.1 Focus: synthesizing themes Three synthesizing themes emerged from thediscussions in the workshops in Tanzania andBolivia. These were discussed first at a meetingwith Dutch scholars working on globalizationissues21 and subsequently within the RAWOOCouncil. The themes can serve as a basis for focusduring the programme-development phase, whenresearch needs in countries of the South will bedefined more specifically.

Finding a balance between ‘global’ and ‘local’culture

The first theme is the cultural dimension ofglobalization and what developing countries can doabout it.

In the case of sub-Saharan Africa, there is cultural22

confusion caused by the combination ofglobalization and centuries of foreign domination.It is often said that the continent must first extractitself from this and then find its own identity. Thecall for an ‘African Renaissance’ by South Africanpresident Thabo Mbeki follows this line ofreasoning, to which a number of African andAfrican-American thinkers have contributed. Theseinclude the Senegalese historian Cheikh Anta Diop,who says, ‘He who has no confidence cannot makeprogress.’ The main question for Africa is thereforehow to encourage the formation of a society thatcan cope with globalization but is still based onprinciples which are supported by local people inaccordance with their own behavioural patterns,attitudes, beliefs and values.

The challenge for people in developing countries isto construct cultures which give new meaning totheir existence and make it possible for them todevelop new alliances and connections with otheractors and to engage in new transactions. To do thisthey have to incorporate elements from othercultures or invent or reinvent their own culturalelements. An example from Bolivia is the way thatpeople who migrate to urban areas must adapt theirculture to an urban environment that includesindigenous and non-indigenous people withdifferent cultural backgrounds.

This raises the following more general questions:• What mix of ‘global’ and ‘local’ culture will give

people the confidence they need to deal withglobalization in the best possible way? The mix

Part III. RAWOO proposal

25

19. There were also a few participants who recommendedsteering a course that defiesglobalization. (In Tanzania oneparticipant gave the example ofCuba. In Mexico there weresupporters of the Zapatistamovement and the Movement ofWorkers without Land in Brazil,which actually follow such acourse.) This option was notdiscussed further, however.

20. The case was cited of theMaurids of Senegal, who havedeveloped trade networks all overEurope and North Americawithout even speaking Europeanlanguages.

21. For the report of thisconsultation, which took place on26 January 2000, see Annex 5.

22. ‘Culture’ here does not referto ‘art’, but to the complex ofideas, practices and beliefs whichgive meaning to what peopleexperience as biological and socialbeings. To a certain extent theseideas have an existence detachedfrom the phenomena to whichthey refer. In that sense, they canbe used or misused to mobilizepeople for a certain course ofaction (persuasion, propaganda).

will have to be such that people do not feeloverwhelmed by cultural influences which theyconsider as foreign while at the same time theyavoid resorting to defensive, chauvinist ethnicidentities which might deny women’s rights, forexample, or cause strife with people of otherethnic backgrounds. What role can traditionsplay in models that prove useful for dealing withglobalization? (The many examples of ethnicgroups or communities that have succeeded inconserving a major portion of their old culturecan be drawn upon here.)

• The next question is how can this mix of new andtraditional cultural elements be achieved, andwho should play a role in the process. The stateas provider of education will be one actor. Otheractors could include the press, artists,universities, religious organizations, ororganizations representing ethnic groups or othergroups in society. How can these actors becomeinvolved and how can their capacity forreflecting on culture be increased?23 Such aneffort should take into account (and thereforestudy) the opposition which can be expectedfrom those who benefit from the status quo.

Governance issuesA whole range of suggestions was made for what‘Tanzania’ or ‘Bolivia’ should do. In fact most ofthese suggestions imply tasks for the state, or forthe state in collaboration with the private sectorand/or civil society:• to negotiate more effectively with multilateral

agencies;• to create a system of incentives which keeps

educated people in the country;• to create an enabling environment for local

businesses in the formal and informal sectors andto encourage the creation of employment;

• to promote the integration of large, medium-sized and small industries;

• to stimulate education;• to redress inequality and alleviate poverty.

One of the consequences of globalization, however,is that the state has a reduced capacity for action.This theme thus deals with what can be done tostrengthen and redefine the state and its new roleswithout making the state a cumbersome machinedominated by a few vested interests which obstructrather than foster development.

This raises the question of how local, provincialand national levels of government can bestrengthened in balance with the organizations of

civil society, using local models of popularparticipation. As reported in 2.1 above, the Bolivians formulatedit this way: ‘the state’s public roles require adifferent ‘institutionality’: modifications in thestructure of state institutions and in themechanisms for cooperating with society. This isnecessary if the state is to develop policies thatrespond to the community’s needs and contribute togood governance.’24

Research is needed that can help the state toformulate policy in a way that is directly related tocivil society, and that incorporates local (or‘traditional’) models of popular participation.

More specific questions under this theme would be:• How can the organizational capacity, efficiency

and accountability of the institutions of the statebe enhanced?

• How can the organizational capacity, efficiencyand accountability of civil society (including theprivate sector) be enhanced, and how can this bebuilt up from below?

• How can social capital best be used: that is, theorganizational capacity that exists in groups insociety?

• How can commitment to the nation be restoredamong people of different ethnic groups? Inother words, how can a new national project berealized which respects and builds on the pluralnature of national societies and which is aimednot at bringing all subjects of the state under asingle national culture, but rather at emphasizingthe various ethnic groups’ shared interest inmaintaining the state as an organization ofpeople living within a certain territory?

• In the context of a developing country, what isthe best mix of state and private enterprise foreducation and health care, and how can moreresources for these sectors be generated?

• What can the state, the private sector and civilsociety do to make education, health care andother services available to everyone?

• How can citizenship rights and duties best bedefined?

General development strategy to be followed bycountries in the South

The third theme which emerged from theworkshops and other Southern sources concerns thecurrent orthodoxy regarding the policies to befollowed by developing countries. The workshopspledged not to accept this orthodoxy but rather totake up the challenge of forging an alternative

III. RAWOO proposal

26

23. Dr. Rijk van Dijk, one of the participants in RAWOO’s meetingwith researchers in theNetherlands who are working onglobalization and countries in theSouth, pointed out thatconsiderable resources are beinginvested in a discussion of Africa’scultural past. Perhaps a discussionof the cultural future can be addedto that discussion.


economic and social model. This means – in theeconomic sphere – careful, selective, strategicintegration into the global economy as the first andbest policy. As regards the cultural dimension ofglobalization, the same approach is advocated: toadopt what is needed in order to benefit fromglobalization and to keep what is needed in order tomaintain a sense of belonging and well-being.

It is clear that lessons can be drawn here from thesuccessful development models of Southeast Asiancountries.

The following specific questions fall under thethird theme:• How much liberalization must be accepted in

order for developing countries to have access tothe benefits of globalization while minimizingthe costs?

• To what extent can countries achieve phased andcontrolled integration into world markets whileat the same time protecting peasants and othervulnerable sectors of society and seizing newopportunities for acquiring the resources andexpertise needed for development?

• How can countries like Tanzania and Bolivia andcertain sectors of Southern societies (e.g.,women, business and industry, peasants, andindigenous groups) make their voices heard ininternational forums such as the World TradeOrganization? What role can be played byregional cooperation and by internationalcoalitions of NGOs, for example?

• Have good examples been set of institutional andindividual practices that reduce the costs andenhance the benefits of globalization, and/or thatredistribute these costs and benefits in asocietally more acceptable way?

• What is the potential of such ongoing processesas the growth of the informal sector, the come-back of Asians in East Africa, and the creation ofnew sources of income for peasants throughorganic agriculture and handicrafts, for example?How can these contribute to sustainabledevelopment?

• What options exist for stopping the brain-drainand finding resources for investing in thegeneration of local knowledge?

Dilemmas in connection with the synthesizingthemes

During RAWOO’s consultation with Dutchscholars working on globalization themes,25 thefollowing dilemmas were highlighted in connectionwith the synthesizing themes just described.

1. Globalization is a ‘container’ concept. Thethree synthesizing themes do not providesufficient focus for a research programme. Itwould be better to focus research cooperationright from the beginning on a number of moreclearly identified themes or issues.

2. The three synthesizing themes do notsufficiently disentangle the factors involved inglobalization. This should be done before theprogramme starts.

With respect to the first dilemma, RAWOO decidedthat the identification of specific research needsshould be done as part of a thorough agenda-settingprocess. This is in keeping with RAWOO’s usualapproach, which is based on dialogue among thestakeholders involved. Research needs areidentified in the context of locally perceivedproblems, and the need to increase the researchcapacities of institutions is taken into account. Thisserves to increase the feeling of ownership of theresearch agenda among all the parties involved inthe process.

As regards the second dilemma, this criticismmainly addresses the fact that globalization is toonarrowly identified with liberalization. It is truethat the workshops in Tanzania and Bolivia and thecongress of rural sociologists in Mexico tended toidentify their governments’ free market policies– for the most part determined by structuraladjustment programmes agreed with theInternational Monetary Fund – as a manifestationof the process of globalization.26 This is quitecommon in much of globalization literature (seesection I.2 above27). But in a concrete researchprogramme such as the one RAWOO is proposing,theories based on this view could turn out to beinadequate. RAWOO is confident that if this is thecase, these theories will quickly make way forbetter ones.

III.1.2. Research for empowerment On the basis of its findings, RAWOO concludesthat an approach to research is needed that takesinto account the complexity of the problem and thenecessity of involving stakeholders in the agenda-setting process.

This approach will have to be needs-based anduser-oriented and contribute to capacity-buildingfor research and policy formulation.

III. RAWOO proposal

27

25. For the report of thisconsultation which took place on26 January 2000, see Annex 5.

26. See, for example,‘Globalization, Liberalization andFiscal Squeeze’ in S.M. Wangweand F.M. Musonda, paper writtenfor the Tanzania workshop, p. 13-14.; also ‘Globalizacióndiferenciadora’ in Xavier Albó,paper written for the Boliviaworkshop, p. 5.

27. In the view of Jan Aart Scholte,this was the prevailing orthodoxyin globalization literature in the1980s and 1990s. See his‘Globalization: a CriticalIntroduction’, Basingstoke,Macmillan, forthcoming, chapter 2,p. 2.

Needs-based and user-oriented: involvingstakeholders

Whereas most research programmes are driveneither by the research community, donors orgovernment, the RAWOO process and its resultsare driven by the needs of stakeholders. If resultsare to be achieved that have practical relevance,stakeholders from outside the research communityneed to be involved in agenda-setting and researchprocesses. As a result, much greater use will bemade of the knowledge generated, which isexpected to be of direct and tangible benefit to thepeople it concerns. The proposed programme willtarget stakeholdersinvolved in processes ofstrategy and policy development who – as aresponse to globalization – need knowledge whichcan be effectively applied to meeting pressing localneeds. In the case of globalization, stakeholders canbe found at national, regional and local levels ofgovernment, in the private sector and in civilsociety.28 In RAWOO’s view, the researchprogramme should focus on local responses toglobalization, which implies that the identificationof stakeholders’ needs starts at the grassroots level.Where necessary from this perspective, theprogramme will trace regional, national andinternational linkages. This calls for the careful anddeliberate planning of a programme which willdevelop from locally identified needs andownership and lead to cooperation above the locallevel when this is needed. The council envisages aprogrammatic approach which combines a localagenda-setting process with extension to otherlevels, including countries of the region whereneeded.

Capacity developmentLocal research is limited by a serious lack ofresearch capacity. The RAWOO initiative aims toaddress this problem and bridge the gap betweenthe various players, to develop communication,dialogue and cooperation between them, and toenhance their capacity to generate, use anddisseminate relevant knowledge.

Support will have to be provided for both strategicand action-oriented research carried out byresearchers representing the academic community,government and NGOs, including businessassociations, local community organizations andwomen’s movements.

Local actors and policy-makers can benefit fromthe process as well as the outcome of the researchprogramme. They will benefit from the lessons

learned and insights gained at the local/nationallevels as a result of the highly participatory andinclusive character of the process. Both will alsobenefit from the comparative analysis of local andnational experiences.

The activities undertaken for purposes of agenda-setting and research management are as importantas the process and the outcome of the research.An agenda-setting process which is inclusive andbuilds trust between agencies with differentperspectives is difficult and time-consuming but atthe same time contributes to capacity enhancement.An effective methodology for agenda-setting couldbe useful also outside the specific location in whichit was developed and first applied.

The proposed programme will pay ample attentionto methodology development specifically suited tothe policy questions related to globalization. Thecore of the programme’s method will be tofacilitate a dialogue and cooperation between theprincipal stakeholders at various levels.

A very important aspect of capacity-building willhave to consist of improving access to existingknowledge. One of the means to achieve this isSouth-South and South-North cooperation.

The programme will have to address the problemthat developing countries lose research capacitythrough brain-drain. Making use of researcherswho have emigrated from their own countries isone option.

Where relevant, the expertise and input of Dutchresearchers with experience in globalization issueswill be mobilized. From a development-cooperation perspective, the participation of Dutchresearchers could contribute in several ways.• It could make it easier for Southern researchers

to gain access to knowledge in the North.• It could enable Southern researchers to study

best practices in the North.• It could stimulate researchers in the South to

work in this field for a sustained period of time.• If programmed in accordance with institutional

needs in the South and implemented on the basisof principles like ownership, relevance andequity, it could help to strengthen and build upresearch capacity on a sustained institutionalbasis.

III. RAWOO proposal

28

28. The Bolivian workshop recommended working with thefollowing sectors of society: smallrural producers, small urbanproducers, manufacturing industry,export manufacturing sector,privatized (former state-owned)industries, women and youth andtheir organizations.

III.2. Programme-development phaseRAWOO proposes the development of a needs-based, long-term multi-disciplinary programme ofinternational cooperation that will generate andmobilize knowledge on the subject of globalizationfor the purpose of developing strategies forproducing adequate local responses toglobalization.

Before this programme can begin, a one-yearprogramming phase is needed in order to:• further specify the research agendas; • develop the most appropriate organizational

structure; and • develop and test a methodology which is suited

to national and local institutional needs.

RAWOO proposes to take responsibility for thisphase and to start programming activities inTanzania and Bolivia. Tanzania and Bolivia havebeen selected as the pilot countries for the RAWOOinitiative because they are among the developingcountries which are benefiting least fromglobalization.29

The objective of this programme-developmentphase will be to work out in more detail the needsfor research – taking into account the outcomes ofthe workshops – and to formulate one or moreresearch programmes to cover those needs.

A first task will be to identify institutions fromwhich a partner can be chosen to take the lead inthe programming exercise. This partner will have tobe a research institution which is acceptable to allthe relevant stakeholders, including government.

The next step will be to jointly identify the networkof institutions which will cooperate in theformulation and implementation of the researchprogramme(s). These will include government aswell as institutions of civil society (NGOs)involved in initiating research and coordinating theuse of its results. They will also include institutionsthat actually conduct research: universities andresearch centres.

A dialogue will be initiated within this networkabout strategies for dealing with globalization.Policy studies at local level will be commissionedon a number of relevant themes. Further agenda-setting will be based on the outcomes of thesestudies and the policy dialogue on strategies. Themost likely result of all this will be theidentification of priority sectors for intervention

and related priority areas for research and capacity-building.

Although a number of important topics for researchhave already been identified during the workshopsin Tanzania and Bolivia, a process of prioritizationand concrete agenda-setting now needs to takeplace. The methodology chosen will involveextensive consultations with stakeholders at localand national levels. It may also involve input fromand exchanges of knowledge and experience withother persons from the broader region(neighbouring countries) and from the Netherlands.The methodology will be regularly evaluatedaccording to procedures agreed to by all involved.Corrections, modifications and even importantchanges can thus be decided upon and implementedin the course of the one-year programming phase aswell as during the research programme itself.

At the end of this one-year process, RAWOO willpresent a comprehensive proposal for a long-termprogramme of activities in the chosen countries.This proposal could include research initiatives inthe chosen regions as well as locally appropriateorganizational and management structures andmethodologies for carrying out the researchprogrammes. Care will be taken to set up theprogrammes in such a way as to ensure thecontinuing involvement of not only the academicresearch communities but also the grassrootsNGOs, local government, women and other actors.In addition, the proposal will provide anunderstanding of institutional needs for capacityenhancement and will propose activities to respondto these needs.

The role of RAWOOIt is RAWOO’s task to programme innovativeresearch as envisioned here, which aims to buildbridges between the needs of societies and thedevelopment of scientific knowledge.

RAWOO will take responsibility for the one-yearphase of programme-development in closecooperation with overseas partners. The RAWOOSecretariat will take responsibility for the financialadministration of the project and will providesupport for the Working Group and for the partnersin Bolivia and Tanzania.

At the end of the one-year programming phase,RAWOO will submit a comprehensive proposal tothe Netherlands government for a long-termresearch programme, as discussed earlier in this

III. RAWOO proposal

29

29. The idea of selecting Boliviaand Tanzania because they arecountries that benefit least fromglobalization was stronglysupported by a number of theDutch scholars who wereconsulted on this initiative.

section. This means that at this stage, besidesseeking the government’s financial support for theprogramming phase, RAWOO is also seeking thegovernment’s long-term commitment to theresearch programme itself. Embarkation on theone-year programming phase will inevitably andjustifiably create expectations of funding for thesubstantive programme which is to follow from thatphase.

III. RAWOO proposal

30

Chair:Prof. J. J. Semboja

Members:Dr I.S.A. BaudProf. Dr M. Diouf (from February 2000)ir M.L.E. Jansen (until June 1999)Prof. dr J.B. OpschoorProf. dr J.M. Richters (until February 2000)Prof. dr E.J. RuitenbergProf. dr W.J.J. Schipper

Secretary:drs E.A. Jansen

Members of the RAWOO Globalization Working Group

Annex 1

Albert, M (1993) Capitalism against capitalism.London, Whurr

Amin, Samir (1997) Capitalism in the age ofglobalization. London, Zed

Appadurai, Arjun (1996) Modernity at large:cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.

Barber, BJ (1996) Jihad vs. McWorld. New York:Ballantine Books

Beck, U (2000) What is globalization? Oxford,Blackwell

Boyer, R and D Drache (eds) (1996) States againstMarkets: the limits of globalization. London,Routledge

Carnoy, M, M Castells, SS Cohen, FH Cardoso(1993) The New Global Economy in theInformation Age. University Park, PA:Pennsylvania State University Press

Connors, M (1997) The race to the intelligent state:charting the global information economy in the 21st

century. Oxford: Capstone

Falk, R (1994) On humane governance: towards anew global politics.Cambridge, Polity

Falk, R (1999) Predatory globalization.Cambridge, Polity

Featherstone, M (ed.) (1990) Global culture:nationalism, globalization and modernity. London:Sage

Gray, HP (1993) Globalization versus nationhood,Development and International Cooperation, 9, 16

Griffin, K (2000) ‘Culture and economic growth:the state and globalization’, in J Nederveen Pieterse(ed.), Global Futures, pp 189-202

Griffin, K and A Rahman Khan (1992)Globalization and the developing world. Geneva,UNRISD

Group of Lisbon (1995) Limits to competition.Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press

Gurnah, Ahmed (1997) Elvis in Zanzibar, in AScott (ed.) The limits of globalization. London,Routledge, pp 116-141

Gurtov, M (1988) Global Politics in the HumanInterest. Boulder, Co: Lynne Rienner

Henderson, J (1993) The Globalisation of HighTechnology Production.London, Routledge

Hirst, PQ and G Thompson (1996) Globalization inquestion. Cambridge, Polity Press

Huntington, S (1996) The clash of civilization. NewYork, Simon and Schuster

Kaplan, RD (1996) The ends of the earth. NewYork, Random House

Mann, M (1997) Has globalization ended the riseand rise of the nation state?, Review ofInternational Political Economy, 4 (3): 472-496

McMichael, Philip (1996) Development and socialchange: a global perspective, Thousand Oaks, Ca,Pine Forge Press

Milner, H (1998) International political economy:beyond hegemonic stability, Foreign Policy, 110:112-123

Moinyhan, DP (1992) Pandemonium.New York,Random House

Morrison, AJ, DA Ricks and K Roth (1991)Globalization versus regionalization: which way forthe multinational? Organizational Dynamics,winter: 17-29

Nederveen Pieterse, J (1995) ‘Globalization ashybridization’, in M Featherstone, S Lash, RRobertson (eds) Global Modernities.London, Sage,pp 45-68

Nederveen Pieterse, J (1996) Globalization andculture: three paradigms, Economic and PoliticalWeekly,31 (23): 1389-1393

Nederveen Pieterse, J (ed.) (2000) Global Futures:shaping globalization. London, Zed Books

Ohmae, K (1992) The Borderless World: Powerand strategy in the global marketplace.London,HarperCollins

Selected References for Part I

Annex 2

Ohmae, K (1995) The End of the Nation State: therise of regional economies.New York, Free Press

Oman, C (1993) Globalization and regionalization,Development and International Cooperation,9, 16

Oman, C (1994) Globalisation and regionalisation:the challenge for developing countries. Paris,OECD

Portes, A (1996) Transnational communities: theiremergence and significance in the contemporaryworld-system, in RP Korzeniewicz and WC Smith(eds), Latin America in the world economy.Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, pp 151-168

Rashid, S (1997) ‘The clash of civilizations’: Asianresponses. Karachi, Oxford University Press

Ritzer, G (1993) The McDonaldization of society.London, Sage

Robertson, R (1992) Globalization. London, Sage

Rosenau, JN (1990) Turbulence in World Politics.Brighton, Harvester

Sachs, J (1998) International economics: unlockingthe mysteries of globalization, Foreign Policy, 110:97-111

Sardar, Z. and B. van Loon (1997) Cultural studiesfor beginners. Duxford, Icon Books

Schiller, HI (1989) Culture Inc.New York: OxfordUniversity Press

South Centre (1993) Facing the challenge:responses to the Report of the South Commission,London, Zed

Stallings, Barbara (ed.) (1995) Global change,regional response: the new international context ofdevelopment. Cambridge, Cambridge UniversityPress

Strange, Susan (1996) The retreat of the state.Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Toulmin, S (1999) The ambiguities ofglobalization, Futures, 31 (9/10): 905-912

Waters, Malcolm (1995) Globalization. London,Routledge

Annex 2. Selected References for Part I

Report on the workshop ‘Local Perspectives on Globalization’, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, 10-11 September 1998

Research on Poverty Alleviation – REPOA

Society for International Development – SID (Tanzania Chapter)

Netherlands Development Assistance Research Council (RAWOO)

Workshop in Tanzania

1

Annex 3

Preface 3

1. Introduction 4

2. Workshop Preparations 4

3. The Workshop 4

4. Synthesis of presentation and discussions: 54.1 What is globalization 54.2 What is Africa’s/Tanzania’s position vis-à-vis globalization 54.3 What should Tanzania do to benefit from globalization 74.4 Suggestions for further research 7

5. Follow Up of the Workshop 8

7. A Partial Review of the Workshop 8

Papers presented at the Tanzania workshop:

T. Ademola Oyejide Globalisation and its Economic Impact: an African Perspective

Brian van Arkadie Globalisation and the East African Economies: an Overall Perspective

S.M. Wangwe & Local Perspectives on Globalisation: the Economic DomainF.M. Musonda

Idris S. Kikula & Local Perspectives on Globalization: the Natural Resources Aida Kiangi Domain in Tanzania

Jenerali Ulimwengu Local Perspectives on Globalisation: the Governance Domain

Issa G. Shivji Globalisation and Civil Society

Penina Mlama Local Perspectives of Globalisation: the Cultural Domain ofGlobalisation

Contents

2

PrefaceRAWOO is exploring the need for research onglobalization as seen from the perspective ofdeveloping countries. This document reports on aworkshop which was held in this context. Threesurveys of literature on globalization available inlibraries in The Netherlands, undertaken byRAWOO, showed that views on globalization fromcountries of the South are not well represented inthe abundance of scientific material on the subjectproduced since it became popular at the beginningof the 1990s. It was therefore decided to gather firsthand views from the South by way of a workshopin Tanzania. The one-country approach, with someparticipants from other African countries, wouldprovide an opportunity for a professionaldiscussion on what globalization means for aparticular country and a clear indication of whatkind of research is needed in order for a countrylike Tanzania to deal effectively with globalization.

Prof. Semboja accepted the request of RAWOO toorganize the workshop and found the TanzanianChapter of the Society for InternationalDevelopment (SID) prepared to share that task withhim and his team at the Research on PovertyAlleviation project. They brought together anoutstanding group of participants from manysectors of Tanzanian society. It is perhaps useful topoint out that the aim of this workshop was not toinvolve stakeholders in the discussion. It was to bea meeting for people who have experience with thevarious aspects of globalization during theirprofessional work.

As you will read in the report, a five-membercommittee has been formed at the end of theworkshop to formulate a Tanzanian researchagenda for ‘local perspectives on globalization’,elaborating on what has been discussed during theworkshop. This committee will workindependently, but RAWOO has offered its supportif this is needed. It is hoped that the outcome of thework of the committee will be a research agendainvolving Tanzanian resources as well aspossibilities for partnerships with the internationalscientific community.

The papers prepared for the workshop will bepublished at a later stage, together with theinterventions of the discussants of all the papers.An additional paper on the environmental effects ofglobalization for Tanzania will be added to thispublication.

On behalf of the Council, I would like to thank theorganizers and participants of the workshop inTanzania for their efforts to make this a successfulworkshop. I do hope those efforts will be rewardedby the kind of follow-up that was envisaged duringthe workshop. Without the energy of the REPOAteam the workshop could not have been sosuccessful.

Ed MaanSecretary, RAWOO

Annex 3. Workshop in Tanzania

3

1. IntroductionThe intention to pursue further research on localperspectives on globalization was formulatedduring the first plenary meeting of RAWOO onFebruary 17-18, 1997. The idea was pursued anddeveloped further during the second and thirdplenary meetings of RAWOO which took place onJune 5-6, 1997 and October 14-15, 1997,respectively. During these meetings the followingdecisions were made:• On the basis of three surveys of literature made

at the request of RAWOO30 and on discussions,the Council made decisions on the concept ofglobalization that may be used; that the focus ofresearch/discussions be on local responses toglobalization; and the dimension/elements ofglobalization.

• The Council concluded that literature onglobalization lacked input from the South.

• The Council decided that a workshop be held inthe South to fill in the gap. Partly due tologistical convenience, Tanzania was chosen tobe host for the workshop.

2. Workshop PreparationsThe workshop was jointly organized by Researchon Poverty Alleviation (REPOA) and the Societyfor International Development (SID) – TanzaniaChapter. The following terms of reference (TOR)were jointly prepared between the Tanzanianpartners and RAWOO:• The purpose of the workshop, i.e. to explore the

need for research in the field of globalization, inparticular its impact at the local level

• It was expected that at the end of the workshopclear statements would be made in the following:what aspects of globalization are most relevant inthe economic, governance, cultural and humansecurity domains? how do globalizationprocesses in these domains affect the socialdynamics of local communities? how can newforms of organization that are developing at thelocal level in reaction to globalization bepromoted? the need and significance of policyrelevant research on globalization.

On the basis of the TOR the Call for Papers wasprepared. Two approaches were used to identifyand commission papers for the workshop. In thefirst place, the Call was published in two prominentdaily newspapers. This approach was intended toattract any individual or group from the generalpublic to submit a concept paper on any of thespecified domains. On the basis of the quality ofthe concept paper the decision would be made

whether or not the author would be requested todevelop a full paper for the workshop.Unfortunately this approach produced very littleresponse, five to be precise, and even these camefrom inexperienced researchers. Therefore, thedecision was made to approach and requestexperienced researchers to contribute papers.Finally, six papers were written in the followingareas:• economic (3)• governance (1)• socio-cultural (1)• civil society (1)

Forty people were invited to participate in a twodays workshop. This included fifteen invitees fromoutside the country. Foreign participation wouldbring in perspectives from other countries.

3. The WorkshopThe two days workshop on ‘Local Perspectives onGlobalization’ was held on September 10-11, 1998at the White Sands Hotel (Dar es Salaam) asplanned. Day one was attended by 33 participants,of which seven were from outside Tanzania; in daytwo 30 participants attended,

of which seven came from outside Tanzania. Threepapers were presented and discussed in each of thetwo days as follows:

Day One:• Globalization and its Economic Impact: An

African Perspective, by T. Ademola Oyejide - Main discussant: Benno Ndulu

• Globalization and the East African Economies:An Overall Perspective, by Brian Van Arkadie- Main discussant: Samuel Wangwe

• Local Perspectives on Globalization: TheEconomic Domain, by S.M. Wangwe and F.M.Musonda- Main discussant: Arthur Mwakapugi

Day Two:• Local Perspectives on Globalization: The

Governance Domain, by Jenerali Ulimwengu- Main discussant: Chris Maina Peter

• Local Perspectives of Globalization: TheCultural Domain, by Penina Mlama- Main discussant: Mwantumu Malale

• Globalization and Civil Society, by Issa G. Shivji- Main discussant: Haroub Othman


4

30. Richters, Annemiek and Mineke Schipper (bibliography byAndrea Lion), ‘The CulturalDimension of Globalisation andResearch for Development’,RAWOO, February 1998 (surveyof literature from the South; notpublished). Krahl, András, ‘ “Southern”Perspectives On Globalisation: AForay into the Socio-EconomicAnd Socio-Political Literature’,RAWOO, February 1998 (surveyof literature from the South; notpublished).Jansen, Eduard, ‘A Sketch ofGlobalisation Issues and ofGlobalisation Studies in theNetherlands’, RAWOO, October1997 (survey of globalisationliterature; not published).

Before the presentations were made on day one,three introductory remarks were made as follows:

a. Welcome Note by J.V. Mwapachu, on behalf ofthe organizers which concluded that theobjective of the workshop was to ‘identify thecentral thrusts of globalization in its multi-faceted character and zero in on those areaswhich demand urgent in-depth policy analyticresearch’. That the ‘workshop marks thebeginning of the serious research effort whoseend product should hopefully influence policymaking from a better informed basis’.

b. The opening speech by M.L. Luhanga, Vice-Chancellor, University of Dar es Salaamemphasized the importance of brainpower inthe globalization process. In this context hebrought in the role of higher education andresearch. He also reminded the meeting theobvious ‘one cannot talk about globalizationand sustainable development without talkingabout environmental concerns and climatechange issues’.

c. Introductory remarks by Ed Maan, Secretary,RAWOO, gave the background for RAWOO’sinvolvement in the issue of globalization andthe reason for sponsoring the workshop. Heemphasized that the RAWOO members andSecretariat attended as listeners.

Each of the substantive presentations werefollowed by detailed comments from thediscussants who were prepared for that purpose.During the afternoon participants made commentsand contributions around (but not necessarilylimited to) the issues which were raised by thesubstantive presentations and their discussants ofthe day. And the sessions concluded by goingthrough a list of potential research topics.

4. Synthesis of presentation anddiscussions

The following is a synthesis of the presentationsand the subsequent discussions, anddecisions/recommendations regarding possibleresearch issues in the area of globalization.

4.1 What is globalization?Although no attempt was made in the workshop tocome up with a formal definition, participantsappeared to agree with the terms of referencewhich defined globalization as ‘the rapidlyincreasing complex interactions between societies,

cultures, institutions and individuals world-wide; itinvolves a compression of time and space and is aprocess which ‘stretches’ social relations, removingrelationships from local contexts to ‘distanciated’global ones’.31

There was general awareness among theparticipants of the workshop that globalizationmeans massive changes world-wide. Because oftechnological change in communications andtransport and of economic liberalisation, the worldhas become one economic unit. Decisions aboutworld affairs are now being taken in the boardrooms of multinational corporations and ofinternational organisations such as the InternationalMonetary Fund and the World Trade Organisation.32

Workshop participants agreed that globalizationbrings opportunities for development as well asrisks and new challenges. Globalization improvesthe allocative efficiency of the economy (by relyingon the market as the ‘invisible hand’ that governsit) and hence increases the economy’s potential forgrowth and employment creation. On the otherhand it causes great inequality as some groups insome countries benefit while other groups andentire countries are not capable of benefiting. Allagreed that it is not possible to escape beinginvolved in globalization. A crucial factor whichdetermines whether people or countries benefitfrom globalization is knowledge (‘brain power’).Correct state policies for creating a favourableeconomic environment are another crucial factor.(Both factors mentioned in the workshop will bediscussed in more detail below).

Globalization’s total preoccupation with growthcauses it to neglect ecological deterioration.

Globalization causes cultural confusion, whichgives people the feeling that they are losing theirgrip on their lives. This may lead to a backlash,with people wanting to go back to ‘old’ values thatthey trust more than the new ones.

4.2 What is Africa’s/Tanzania’sposition vis-à-vis globalization?

One of the papers presented to the workshop arguesthat Africa has been dominated economically andculturally by outside interests in the periods ofslavery, colonialism and post-colonial cold warmanoeuvring. This domination has eroded Africa’spower for self-determination. The result is:fragmented and fragile economic structures thathave given Africa the now seemingly irreversible


5

31. This definition is based on the one given by John Tomlinson in hispaper ‘Cultural Globalization:Placing and Displacing the West’,p. 22-23. In: Kay, C. (ed.), TheEuropean Journal of DevelopmentResearch, vol. 8, nr. 2, December1996.

32) However, even in those boardrooms, the economy cannot becontrolled completely, since it hasits own logic. Even multinationalcorporations in the USA cannotavoid being affected by the EastAsian and Russian economic crisis.

character of poverty. It has given rise to anomaliesranging from dictatorships, military regimes,pseudo-multiparty democracies to sheer anarchy.

The paper argues that globalization gives even lessopportunity to formulate an African vision. It isleading to rapid changes of behaviour and attitudes,cultural confusion, stagnation in culture, the rise ofglobal religions, particularly the fundamentalistbranches of them.

In the course of the workshop, a number of externalfactors which restrict Africa’s and Tanzania’sabilities to benefit from globalization werementioned:• Low prices for primary commodities which are

the bulk of African countries’ exports; continuedexistence of trade barriers for products fromsouthern countries on northern markets (tariffbarriers and barriers in the form of qualityrequirements, etc); existing trade preferences forthe benefit of southern countries (e.g. the LoméConvention with the European Union) maydisappear as a result of the new rules of theWTO; formation of EU and NAFTA and otherblocks, which limit access to their markets fornon-member countries.

• Large payments on external debt which hasbrought dependence on the IMF with itsstructural adjustment programmes. These SAPshave implied a dramatic decline in investment ineducation and health services, and the suspensionof state support to the poor. Because ofTanzania’s foreign debt, it is very dependent onits creditors and is not free to decide its owneconomic policies.

• Barriers for the free flow of labour. If there weremore migration to industrial countries, thiswould mean more remittances to developingcountries of money earned in the rich countries.For many countries, those remittances are asubstantial source of income.

• UN institutions with a role in the world economysuch as World Bank, WTO and IMF aredominated by the USA and other rich countries;regulations formulated by those organisations arenot to the benefit of developing countries

The workshop also discussed internal factors whichrestrict Africa’s and Tanzania’s abilities to benefitfrom globalization:• Government policies that are inimical to capital

and skilled labour and thus drive away potentialfor growth and prosperity

• High ‘transaction costs’ for investors, arisingfrom among others, lack of good infrastructure,erratic availability of power and water, unstableand inconsistent government policies, insecurityof contracts, bureaucratic procedures andcorruption.

• Governments which are not well prepared tonegotiate in organisations such as the WorldBank, IMF, WTO; this includes a lack ofadequate institutions to prepare negotiations aswell as lack of adequately prepared andmotivated government officials to conductnegotiations.

• Lack of skills in business to deal with therequirements of export markets, such asmarketing, packaging, changing tastes, etc. Thisis partly due to the fact that Tanzania has been aclosed economy until fairly recently so thatbusinesses have no experience in these things.

• Instead of improving, the knowledge base of thecountry is actually deteriorating, with schoolenrolment going down, and schools anduniversities starved of funding.

• Economic problems have eroded the attitude thathard work leads to success in life; opportunism isnot a good basis for development

• Democratic institutions are still infant and weak.• Lack of a national development vision to guide

the country in matters of globalization.

As a result of these negative factors, there is verylittle foreign direct investment in Tanzania, andmost of what does come is of a predatory nature:investment in sectors which require little capitaland give quick results. Gains in employment in theprivate sector have not been able to offset losses inthe state sector where government enterprises havebeen forced to close under liberalisation (SAP)policies. There is a brain drain to countries of thenorth.

Most participants in the workshop were ratherpessimistic about Africa’s and Tanzania’s chancesto benefit from globalization. Some, however,warned that a negative mindset may become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In any case, it was pointed out that not all countriesof Africa are in the same position. This position isdetermined by, among other things, their naturalendowment, level of industrialisation, volume oftrade, degree of diversification, market access indeveloped markets, terms of trade for theirproducts. South Africa, Mauritius, Uganda areexamples of African countries which are doing


6

relatively well under globalization. Withincountries, different sectors may be affected in adifferent way: in the past, the peasant export cropsector in Tanzania had a much more positivedevelopment than the plantation sector, forexample.

There were some voices in the workshop sayingthat the present world financial crisis may be anopportunity for countries like Tanzania, just as theGreat Depression of the 1930s helped SouthAmerican countries to build up their own industriesat a time when there was little competition fromnorthern countries whose economies were in crisis.

4.3 What should Tanzania do tobenefit from globalization?

A broad Tanzanian vision on what globalizationmeans and how the country can deal with it shouldbe developed as the basis for action. A new ‘mindset’ is needed.

There should be phased and controlled integrationbecause a big bang into the globalization processwould lead to more victims than the developingcountries like Tanzania can afford.

Participants agreed that Tanzania should join forceswith other countries in the region, e.g. the SouthernAfrican Development Community (SADC). Theadvantages are that in that way a larger market canbe created for Tanzanian products and these othercountries may also be a source for investment. Inaddition, regional groupings may bargaincollectively and thus more effectively withorganisations such as the WTO and the EU.

Several participants maintained that Tanzaniashould develop its own strong industrial sector.Other participants expressed their doubts about thefeasibility of such a drive in view of the fact thatTanzania at present is not in a position to give anascent industrial sector any state protection.

The consensus among the participants was that thestate should definitely play a role similar to the roleof the state in East Asian countries which has beena prominent factor in their rapid development. Itshould be a state supported by the people andresponsive to the people, a state which strives toeliminate corruption.

Participants indicated that the state should be mademore competent to:• conduct better negotiations with international

organisations such as the WTO and withmultinational corporations

• create a market environment conducive to theright kind of investment, including an adequatetax structure, good infrastructure, consultancyservices for nascent national industries.

There was consensus that Tanzania should investheavily in education and training. Brain drainshould be stopped by creating an adequateincentive structure. Ways should be found to makeuse of talented Tanzanians living overseas.

4.4 Suggestions for further researchThe workshop yielded several suggestions forfurther research:• The experience of other countries such as those

in East Asia, and the more successful countriesin Africa; the experience of the Asians in EastAfrica (studied perhaps against the backgroundof the role of the Chinese in East Asia) as well asthe factors that have generated a rapid growth ofsmall industries in Tanzania in the last few years.

• The impact of globalization on the key sectors ofthe economy.

• How different sectors of Tanzanian society copewith globalization. For instance, the NgorongoroMaasai have decades of fighting for theirtraditional land rights behind them. Groups ofwomen have resisted the creation of large statefarms in their home region. The role oforganizations such as trade unions, cooperatives,religious organizations, local self-helporganizations. Concepts developed in the north(‘civil society’) may not be adequate for thestudy of social movements in Africa/Tanzania; ahome-grown approach is necessary.

• Utilization of human capital, brainpower,prevention of brain drain and the process ofglobalization

• The role of multinational corporations, foreigndirect investments, national capital as well as thecapacity of the state in the creation of anenabling business environment.

• The compatibility between national andinternational legal regimes in the globalizationprocess

• The place of regional integration in thefacilitation of production and trade


7

5. Follow up of the WorkshopAt the end of the second day participants discussedfuture activities. The participants agreed that twoimportant activities be undertaken as soon aspossible:• publication of the workshop proceedings,• formulation of a research agenda on the ‘local

perspectives on globalization’.

The participants agreed that the responsibility toprepare and publish the workshop proceedings begiven to the workshop organizers, i.e. Society forInternational Development (SID) – TanzaniaChapter and REPOA.

A working group of five members was appointedfrom among the participants to formulate proposalsfor how the research agenda should be developed.This working group is composed of Issa Shivji,Samuel Wangwe, Juma Mwapachu, AmandinaLihamba, and Joseph Semboja.

At the end of the workshop it was clear thatresearch in many fields (and often interdisciplinaryin nature) was necessary. This implies that researchshould be done in close collaboration with all thestakeholders and that this research should alsoencompass international comparison. Participantsfurther emphasised the use of appropriatetheoretical frameworks in undertaking policyoriented research.

6. A Partial Review of the Workshop Unfortunately the participants were not asked toevaluate the workshop. Therefore, we do not haveviews from independent reviewers. Nevertheless, itis still useful to review performance, even if fromthe organizers’ point of view.

In general the preparations went smoothly, thanksto the e-mail facility which has made life easy andcheaper. However some invited paper writers andparticipants could not be easily reached. As a resultsome of the known experts could not participate.

The six papers that were planned were submittedon time. The quality of the papers was also good,judging from the participants mood and level andamount of discussions generated.

Workshop attendance was good, the composition ofthe group of participants brought a wide variety ofpoints of view. It was interesting to notice the fullparticipation of some very senior individualsduring both days. On the other hand may beobserved that for various reasons relatively fewwomen participated and that in spite of our effort toput it on the agenda, the cultural dimension ofglobalization was not as widely debated as we hadhoped.

A clear oversight, arising from the beginning of thepreparations is the conspicuous absence of a paperon environment. This oversight was noted by theorganizers during the final preparation days, whenit was already too late to do anything substantive.Nevertheless, issues related to environment wereraised in the workshop and plans are underway tocommission a paper in this area, to fill in this gap.


8

The Effects of Globalization in Bolivia Report on the International WorkshopSanta Cruz de la Sierra, 29-30 September 1999

Netherlands Development AssistanceResearch Council (RAWOO)

Centro de Estudios para el DesarrolloLaboral y Agrario (CEDLA)

La Paz, November 1999

Workshop in Bolivia

1

Annex 4

Presentation 3

1. Background 4

2. Organisation 4

3. Workshop development 5

4. Summary of presentations and debate 54.1 Bolivia’s situation in the globalisation scenario 64.2 The meaning of globalisation 64.3 The economic and productive dimension 74.4 The political and institutional dimension 84.5 The cultural dimension 84.6 The social dimension 94.7 Future approaches 9

5. Recommendations for a research agenda 95.1 Research topics and problems 95.2 Priority actors 115.3 Methodological approach for implementing the research agenda 11

6. Follow-up on recommendations 11

7. Evaluation of the workshop 11

Papers presented at the workshop in Bolivia:

Horst Grebe López Efectos económicos de la globalización

Silvia Escóbar de Pabón Efectos sociales de la globalización

Xavier Albó Efectos culturales de la globalización

Manuel Suárez Efectos político-institucionales de la globalización

UNDP Bolivia Desafíos frente a la Globalización en Bolivia y la Región

Roberto Vilar Efectos de la globalización: aproximaciones a la visión de las organizaciones sociales: Síntesis de un sondeo de opinión

Contents

2

PresentationThe International Workshop on ‘The Effects ofGlobalisation in Bolivia’ was held in Santa Cruz dela Sierra on 29-30 September 1999, within theframework of a cooperation agreement between theCentro de Estudios para el Desarrollo Laboral yAgrario (Labour and Agricultural DevelopmentStudies Centre – CEDLA) and the NetherlandsResearch for Development Advisory Council(RAWOO).

This document contains the final report on theworkshop’s activities. The first part includes thebackground, a summary of the discussions and themain conclusions and recommendations. Thesecond part is made up of 6 appendices whichinclude the papers presented by the Bolivianparticipants and the comments made by invitedspecialists from other Latin American countries.

Appendix 6 presents the results of an opinionsurvey that was carried out with representatives ofsociety’s different actors. The purpose of thesurvey was to gather first hand information aboutthe ways in which these actors perceive the effectsof globalisation on their day-to-day activities.

CEDLA and RAWOO would like to thankeveryone who contributed to the analysis anddebate on this issue that is currently of suchpressing concern and influencing all areas of life insociety. As a result, we have been able to arrive atsuggestions for a future agenda for high priorityand relevant research that will contribute to thediscussion around policies aimed at addressingglobalisation under better conditions.

In particular, we would like to acknowledge thesupport provided by the Agencia Española deCooperación Internacional (Spanish InternationalCooperation Agency – AECI) which enabled theevent to take place in Santa Cruz de la Sierra.

In fulfilling their commitment to publish anddisseminate the material and results achieved inthis first workshop, the organisers are confidentthat it will further encourage the commondetermination to continue contributing criticalknowledge to the debate, within the framework ofnew national initiatives and cooperation withRAWOO.

Javier Gómez AguilarCEDLA Director

Annex 4. Workshop in Bolivia

3

1. BackgroundWith the objective of exploring new needs forscientific research within the framework of North-South cooperation, the Netherlands Research forDevelopment Advisory Council (RAWOO)incorporated the subject of globalisation as part ofits working agenda. In 1997 RAWOO started aprocess of reviewing the literature on the subject,looking at it overall and focusing on its economicand cultural aspects. The review found anabundance of scientific material but scarceevidence that the views of the countries of theSouth were being reflected.

In the light of these results, RAWOO decided toapproach the South’s thinking and views directly,by organising workshops in selected countries. Theidea was to hold discussions with representatives ofdifferent sectors of society on the meaning ofglobalisation and the type of research needed tomeet its challenges effectively.

A first workshop was held in Tanzania inSeptember 1998 and included participants fromother African countries. This workshop madeimportant contributions to the debate on the subjectas well as suggestions for building a researchagenda aimed at achieving a greater understandingof the meaning of globalisation and its effects,using a critical and forward-looking approach.

With similar objectives in mind, the Councildecided to hold a second workshop in a LatinAmerican country. In May 1999, the Labour andAgricultural Development Studies Centre(CEDLA) took up the RAWOO Secretariat’ssuggestion of jointly organising this secondworkshop in Bolivia. CEDLA decided to join inthis initiative since it falls within the framework ofits own institutional mission and objectives, whichare aimed at carrying out applied research tocontribute to development. As well as the presenceof Bolivian participants with the skills andexperience needed to address the differentdimensions of globalisation, it was agreed to invitespecialists from other Latin American countries inorder to enrich the discussion that would be basedon the particular experience of the Bolivian case.

The International Workshop on ‘The Effects ofGlobalisation in Bolivia’ was held in the city ofSanta Cruz de la Sierra on 29-30 September 1999.

2. OrganisationOverall coordination of the workshop was theresponsibility of the RAWOO Secretariat,represented by Eduard Jansen, and CEDLA’sExecutive Director, Javier Gómez Aguilar. SilviaEscóbar de Pabón, a CEDLA researcher, was incharge of thematic and operational coordination.

The workshop’s objective was aimed at identifyingneeds for scientific research on the globalisationprocess, in order to contribute to decision-makingfor policies and action on those aspects withgreatest relevance for taking advantage ofopportunities and/or facing up to threats, bearing inmind the socio-economic, cultural and politicaleffects of globalisation in Bolivia and the region asa whole.

The methodology adopted enabled an appropriatebalance to be struck between presentations,comments and debate on the effects of theglobalisation process from a national and regionalpoint of view. It also enabled different social actorsto present their views on the effects of globalisationwith regard to current economic, social, politicaland cultural processes. Finally, there was a spacefor group work that aimed to enrich the analysisand the discussion about a research needs agenda.All this contributed to ensure that the proposedobjectives were achieved.

In order to outline the workshop’s scope, itsexpected results were defined and suggested centralthemes were brought together in the terms ofreference for presenters and commentators. It wasproposed to participants that they should arrive at asituation synopsis on the following topics:• The aspects of globalisation with greatest

relevance to national development, taking intoaccount its economic, social, cultural andpolitical-institutional dimensions.

• The ways in which the globalisation process inthese areas affects social behaviours in localcommunities.

• The forms of citizen organisation and action thatare present in the new scenario and theirprospects with regard to the new roles demandedby the globalisation process.

• The nation state’s degree of autonomy indefining policies and the new roles required tocombat globalisation’s tendency to be unequaland excluding.


4

The criteria adopted for the selection ofparticipants aimed to encourage an exchange ofmany different views using a multidisciplinaryapproach. This was done by invitingrepresentatives from different sectors of civilsociety, the academic community, NGOs andpolicy-makers.

To achieve a regional overview in the discussionand definition of the research agenda, well-knownsocial science researchers from four LatinAmerican countries were also invited.

3. Workshop developmentThe workshop was opened by Javier Gómez,CEDLA’s Executive Director, and Eduard Jansen,RAWOO Secretariat member. Both theserepresentatives of the organisers stressed howimportant this event was for making progress in theanalysis of globalisation and its effects, as well asfor identifying high priority research topics to takeadvantage of globalisation’s opportunities and faceup to its threats.

Javier Gómez emphasised the effort that had beenmade to include the results of an opinion survey inthe discussion. This survey asked representatives ofbusiness, social and labour organisations todescribe the effects of globalisation on their day-to-day activities and identify both its areas of potentialand the threats it poses. Mr Gómez invitedparticipants to unravel the meaning of globalisationby bringing together analyses from Bolivia andother countries in the region, in order to identifycentral issues and arrive at an agenda for scientificresearch that will have an influence on publicpolicies.

Eduard Jansen explained that RAWOO’s mandateis to give advice on how the cooperation resourcesallocated to research for development in theNetherlands should best be used. It seeks newforms of cooperation to encourage researchpractices in countries in the South, stronger linkswith those who will use the knowledge and closerconnections between disciplines.

Mr Jansen went on to describe the process followedby the workshop held in Tanzania, and outlined itsmain conclusions and recommendations. He urgedparticipants to contribute to the analysis anddiscussion, bearing in mind that globalisation iscurrently an important issue for Bolivia and LatinAmerica. Furthermore, he recommended that theyidentify relevant themes to meet the challenges

posed by globalisation. These will be used as inputsfor a recommendations paper to be drawn up byRAWOO for the Development CooperationMinistry in the Netherlands.

The workshop’s activities then began, with thefollowing agenda:

The economic effects of globalisationPresenter: Horst Grebe L. – BoliviaCommentator: Enrique de la Garza – MexicoQuestions and debate

The social effects of globalisationPresenter: Silvia Escóbar de Pabón – BoliviaCommentator: Héctor Béjar – PeruQuestions and debate

The cultural effects of globalisationPresenter: Xavier Albó – BoliviaCommentator: María Cristina Mata – ArgentinaQuestions and debate

The political and institutional effects ofglobalisation

Presenter: Manuel Suárez – BoliviaCommentator: Juan Enrique Vega – ChileQuestions and debate

The challenges posed by globalisation in Boliviaand the region

Commentator: Armando OrtuñoQuestions and debate

The effects of globalisation: an approach to theviews of social organisations

Presenter: Roberto Vilar – Synthesis of an opinionsurveyQuestions and debate

Group work

Plenary session: presentation of conclusions andrecommendations by working groups

Closure of the workshopFernando Prado – Bolivia

4. Summary of presentations anddebate

This section summarises the main aspects of thediscussion during the workshop with regard to thefour dimensions taken into account in the analysisof the globalisation process and its effects, both inthe case of Bolivia and in the region as a whole.


5

The synthesis places an emphasis on those aspectsthat are directly linked to the analysis of thesituation in Bolivia and the themes and problemssuggested by participants for building a researchagenda. The summary therefore aims to present thearguments underlying the analysis.

4.1 Bolivia’s situation in theglobalisation scenario

In the participant’s view, the situation in Boliviafeatures the persistence of economic and socialstructures that are characterised by inequality andneed to be changed. This aspect is no longer theobject of critical analysis. Instead, it has given wayto the globalising discourse that seeks only toinquire into what should be done in production andtrade to make the country competitive.

The main internal factors mentioned in thepresentations and the debate show that the newscenario being created by globalisation poses morethreats than opportunities, and that these arenegatively reinforced by external factors associatedwith the new international scenario.

i. Internal factors• Weak economic dynamism and absence of

conditions that would make growth ratessustainable.

• Growth benefits only the monopolies andoligopolies; the most profitable companies do notcontribute significantly to the country, either interms of taxes or employment.

• Consolidation of raw materials in foreign trade,low level of dynamism in exports and seriousaccumulated deterioration in the terms of trade.

• Tendency towards increase in the balance oftrade deficit.

• High degree of dependence on the transfer ofexternal resources to cover the savings deficit,the balance of payments deficit and the demandfor foreign exchange.

• Absence of guidance for national capital tomodernise; heterogeneity in technology andproductivity; absence of linkages betweensectors and industries; greater concentration ofeconomic activity in certain areas of the country.

• The capitalisation of strategic state enterpriseshas not had positive repercussions in terms ofproductive link-ups or technology transfer; FDIhas led only to the transfer of assets to foreigncapital.

• Dominant presence of foreign capital that enjoyspreferential treatment in comparison withnational investment; tendency towards

consolidation of a two-speed economy, withnegative repercussions on economic growth,participation in external markets andimprovements in the quality of employment.

• Huge inequalities in the negotiating power of thedifferent sectors of economic activity.

• Weak capacity to generate productiveemployment, deterioration in the quality ofemployment and increasing under-employment.

• Denial of rights of access to productive resources(land, capital, knowledge) for the vast majorityof the population.

• Internal colonialism, persistence of culturaldomination structures in inter-ethnic relations.

• Indigenous communities relegated to the mostisolated regions with few links to the market.

• Weakening of the social movement.• Persistence of an elitist, anti-public state;

weakening of the state’s guiding role in the lifeof society.

• Loss of the state’s autonomy and capacity forstrategic management to guide development.

• Weak democratic institutions.• Crisis in the elite; absence of entrepreneurial

culture.• Widening of social disparities, as evidenced by

the persistence of poverty and the enormousinequalities in income distribution.

• Presence of phenomena such as urban violence,crime and domestic violence, as an effect of theerosion of community ties and the loss ofidentities and sense of belonging.

• New forms of exclusion directed against women,youth and indigenous peoples.

ii. External factors• External debt servicing still accounts for about

20% of the national budget each year, therebylimiting governments’ room for manoeuvre.

• Conditionality imposed by multilateralinstitutions; the policies that determine thedirections taken by the country are the result ofnegotiations with international creditors (IMF,World Bank, IDB).

• Long-term depression in the world economy withnegative effects on Bolivian exports.

• Economic agents are pushing globalisationforward in accordance with their own interests,which tends to marginalise certain regions andcertain countries within regions.

4.2 The meaning of globalisationThere is a widespread sense that we are involved inprocesses whose guiding forces and direction wedo not know, or do not manage to perceive. For


6

some, these apparently invisible, disembodied,faceless forces, with no nationality or identity, aredriving us in a direction that is unknown, far lessconsciously and collectively chosen by members ofsociety. For others, although there does not seem tobe a conspiracy in globalisation, the process ismore complex: external forces are becomingentangled with internal ones. It is not a neutraltendency, and does not have a multilateral agent asis the case with neoliberal policies. It has agentsthat are promoting it in accordance with their owninterests and their own policies: transnationalcompanies, the financial system, the mass mediaconglomerates, etc.

This is why it is important to be aware of thechanges that are taking place around the world, andnot just how they affect us here. We need to knowhow policy decision-making mechanisms functionin the US and Europe, and not just in our owncountries.

Another aspect of the debate poses the questionabout the extent to which we are moving towards aglobal society: to what extent are the trendstowards globalisation minimising national and localstructures, subjects and inter-relationships? If weaccept the hypothesis that global phenomena arebecoming localised, the forces of mediation willdefine the way in which we participate inglobalisation. Discovering what these forces ofmediation are, using a multidisciplinary approach,seems to be one of the key ways of makingprogress in this discussion.

Meanwhile, there is broad agreement that thefollowing can be highlighted as some of the mostvisible effects of the new world scenario:• It simultaneously exacerbates the imbalances in

participation in the new world order and widensthe distances that exist within each society. Agreater concentration of wealth and a relative andabsolute increase in poverty are its most visiblemanifestations.

• It speeds up the modernisation of societies tosuch a degree of differentiation and complexitythat the state finds it increasingly difficult torepresent and regulate the diversity of socialprocesses. In this sense, globalisation ends upproposing the fall of politics and the hegemonyof the market.

• It provokes changes of such magnitude and speedthat the codes used to interpret reality haveshifted. We are therefore without a compass withwhich to guide ourselves in an increasingly

complex world. The knowledge maps that helpedus to fix horizons and select possible routes havebeen destroyed.

• It introduces into the ideological discourse ofpower the illusory idea that cultural gaps can beclosed and exclusion eliminated by informationtechnology: an illusion of equal opportunities.

4.3 The economic and productivedimension

• One aspect considered to be relevant forintegration into the globalisation process is tochange the conditions of competitiveness bymeans of technological and organisationalinnovations in the conditions of production.

• There is a need to identify the forms adopted bythe productive transformation processes in ourcountries and the hither to unexploited localstrengths and traditions of different models ofproduction, on the basis of which leaps forwardcan be taken. The parameters to be consideredshould be not just the contribution these modelscan make to creating the conditions forcompetitiveness and participation in internationalmarkets, but also their capacity to create properjobs and greater human resources development.

• All the evidence in the case of Bolivia, as well asthose studies available in Latin America, indicatea tendency to establish two socio-technicalconfigurations in the restructuring of production.The first, which is currently the dominant one, isa conservative restructuring limited toimprovements in machinery and equipment(partial renovation), without organisationalchanges. The second is a flexible restructuringbased on new ways of organising work and theapplication of certain aspects of total quality. Inany case, the data support the polarisationhypothesis. At one extreme, transformations aretaking place in just a few sectors and a fewcompanies within sectors. The other extreme isthe majority, made up largely of medium, smalland micro-businesses, where no changes aretaking place in the conditions of production andwhich interact in a framework of furtherincreases in heterogeneity.

• The state has not been totally absent from therestructuring of production, although itsintervention is now very different to what it wasduring the import substitution era. The state’sintervention has taken the form of wage policiesthat have tended to keep wages at a level lowerthan inflation, and support for the flexibilisationof labour markets which has generally impliedthe submission of the trade unions. Despite the


7

advantages this represents for capital,transformations in the organisation of productionand work processes have not been widespread inthe region’s economies.

• With regard to the profile of the workforce, thereseems to have been no tendency toward achangeover based on the possibilities offered bytechnological and organisational innovations orflexible specialisation. Upgrading the skills ofthe workforce may well be one of the mostneglected aspects in today’s restructuringprocess. Employers have preferred to stick with aTaylorist work strategy while implementing onlycertain aspects of the new technologies or waysof organising.

• How is the business community organising itsmodernisation processes? Are we looking at adeficit of entrepreneurial culture or rather adeficit of political culture with regard to theeconomy? It would seem that the crisis in thestate’s guiding role in society is compounded bya crisis in the elite, which is preventing themodernisation of national capital.

• One characteristic of globalisation is the entry oftransnational capital in national economies.However, one little known aspect is the way inwhich this movement of capital is beginning tostimulate changes in the pattern of productionand technological linkages or innovations inother sectors of these economies. As far weknow, foreign capital’s aim is to recover itsinvestments in the shortest possible time, and ithardly ever introduces the best practices used inits head offices.

• In the light of these current trends in LatinAmerica, changes in this area will not bepossible while market forces remain inert. Thereis a need for the state to take forward strategiesto develop a new pattern of production andwidespread growth in productivity. Likewise, thestate needs to take advantage of the sub-regionalintegration agreements with clear and transparentpolicies based on the potential of the localeconomy.

4.4 The political and institutionaldimension

• The state in Latin American countries hasexperienced a loss of sovereignty when facedwith global pressures. The high level ofindebtedness and dependency on externalresources have been factors exerting formal andinformal pressure. Little is known, however,about the new form the state is adopting.

• The state is not weak when it comes to actions toprotect large global capital and internationalisednational capital. Neither is it weak when it comesto disciplining the labour market. It can thereforebe inferred that there is a space for formulatingand managing public policies based on nationalagendas.

• There is a need to rethink the role of the state asa public body. Is it possible for society to existoutside the borders of the nation state? Theideology that seeks to impose the pure rationalityof the market needs to be counteracted by thedebate about the state: we need to recover thehope that it can develop in other ways andcontribute to determining what those ways willbe.

• The state’s public roles require a differentinstitutionality, modifications in the structure ofstate institutions and in the mechanisms forcooperating with society, in order to developpolicies that respond to the community’s needsand contribute to governability.

• One unavoidable challenge is therefore to forgean alternative economic and social model. This isnot just because of the empirical evidence of theresults of neoliberal policies but also because itstheoretical foundations are weak. A societysubordinated to the market is not viable: thereare power problems that go beyond the market.

4.5 The cultural dimension• Globalisation is pushing us to modify and dilute

previous identities. There is a tension betweentwo alternatives: dilute our identities to avoidbeing marginalised, thereby giving rise to hybridcultures, or strengthen native identities. Thetension is resolved mainly by opting for the firstalternative, whether the community ismarginalised from globalisation’s economicstructures or from access to education andinformation, and it almost always costs thecommunity the loss of its previous identity.

• In the new context of the information society, theself-representation systems constructed bymarginalised communities about their ownsituation are not known. Under what conditionsis culture being built? What are the newimaginary constructs in the context ofglobalisation? At the moment there is aperceptible common movement towards culturalglobalisation or the predominant effect of it:illusions of equal access and levelling up arebeing constructed, but they run parallel toincreasingly unequal and fragmented livingconditions.


8

• Different ways of life tend to be punished bydiscrimination and inequality.

• There is a need to promote knowledge so that wecan work towards the recomposition ofeffectively diverse and integrated societies. Thedata that reveal diversity, exclusion and conflictsneed to be linked up with their meanings which,being felt data, constitute what is real.

• The state has a role to play in promoting culturalintegration policies. Multiculturalism should beconstructed by the education system itself.

4.6 The social dimension• Within the framework of globalisation, the gaps

in the distribution of wealth between thedeveloped countries and the rest of the world arewidening.

• The maintenance of unequal economic, socialand political structures is generating greaterpolarisation of wealth, inequality and growingsocial exclusion.

• We are witnessing new ways for social inequalityand exclusion to manifest themselves. They areexpressed in a growing individualisation of work(and the explosion of the informal sector), thesuper-exploitation of labour and the difficulty ofgaining access to jobs that provide a regularsource of income.

• Tolerated discrimination against women, childrenand other categories of workers is a new form ofexclusion. It is accentuated by the processes ofrural-urban migration and is spreading to thecultural sphere.

• Lower levels of social protection and limitedaccess to education, health and housing systemsis another of inequality’s visible faces. This isreinforced by the absence of effectivemechanisms for participating in taking decisionsthat affect social groups and citizens.

• As a result of the limits on effectiveparticipation, the consolidation of localorganisations as a forum for collective action andinteraction with the political decision-makingsystem is poor. We are witnessing a weakeningof traditional social movements and the gradualemergence of new actors. These centre theirdiscourse around concrete needs and concentrateless on strategic needs aimed at contributing tothe construction of a social project.

4.7 Future approaches• The debate during the workshop has emphasised

the need to discuss the relationship between

globalisation and neoliberal structural adjustmentpolicies.

• Future research on the subject needs to constructits own frameworks for interpretation based onan analysis of problems that will serve to guidetheoretical reflection.

• It is essential to adopt multidisciplinaryapproaches because of the multifaceted nature ofglobalisation and the interaction of economic andpolitical factors with cultural and social ones.

• From a regional perspective (Latin America), itwill be relevant to undertake research of acomparative and inter-institutional nature. In theimmediate future, there is thought to be a need tocarry out a survey of those institutions workingon the issue of globalisation in Latin Americafrom different perspectives. At a time of globalnetworks, working as a network could producefruitful results for a discussion in global forumson the impact of the new supranational worldscenario.

5 Recommendations for a researchagenda

Organised into working groups, the workshop’sparticipants contributed a series of research topicsand problems with a view to constructing anagenda for knowledge about Bolivia’s involvementin the globalised world.

The general hypothesis that guided the formulationof the agenda affirms that we in the South shouldgain access to approaches and concepts ofinterpretation produced within the framework ofother realities. Readings and interpretations of howour countries participate in the globalisationcontext therefore require the production of thinkingof our own, based on an analysis of reality that willserve to guide theoretical reflection, in order toreach an understanding of the extent to which ourcountries are in a condition to link up with thisprocess.

The problems identified were prioritised by takinginto account their relevance to development andtheir contribution to decision-making for policiesand actions by the different sectors of society.

5.1 Research topics and problems

The state and societyThere are conditions in the internationalglobalisation scenario that affect the state’s actionsand provoke greater tensions that prevent socialcohesion. We should seek to generate knowledge


9

and reflection by linking national and regionalaspects (Latin America) with global aspects in thepolitical arena.

• State- The state’s scope for designing and managing

public policies; the possibilities for drawing upour own development agendas (navigationcharts).

- Redefinition of the state and its new roles toachieve social cohesion and good qualitygovernment.

- The implications of the state’s new roles forinstitutionality at the national, regional andlocal levels and for external management.

- Global political actors and globalgovernability.

• Society- Social actors, their roles and relationships; the

potential for improving the quality of thesocial fabric.

- Socio-economic transformations and thepossibilities cultural change offers for theadoption of new models of social organisationand cohesion in response to globalisation(trade union organisation and action, businessorganisations, women’s movements, ethnicmovements).

• Relations between the state and society- Political changes and the possibility of new

forms and levels of democratic representation.- Decentralisation and local power.- Experiences of cooperation between the state

and civil society.

The economy and labourGlobalisation proposes that we should adopt newmodels of production that promote linkagesbetween and within sectors and a systemic increasein productivity, as a condition for achieving levelsof social integration and competitivenesscompatible with the demands of a globalisedeconomy. Research in this area should aim todiscover local forms of mediation that can berecovered to improve involvement in theinternational economy, and the incentive systemsneeded to strengthen them.

• New forms of organising production and work,and local strengths that can be used to improvecompetitiveness.

• Productive linking scenarios and the potential forsystemic improvements in competitiveness.

• Reconfiguration of urban and rural labourmarkets, employment and working conditions,from the perspectives of gender and age.

• The impact of foreign direct investment onproductive linkages, employment and theconfiguration of new production organisationmodels (direct and indirect impact).

• Entrepreneurial strategies (large, medium andsmall businesses) to deal with a globalisedeconomy.

• Elites and entrepreneurial culture.• The coca economy and its impact on national

income.

Economic integration and participation in theinternational economy

Globalisation maintains and aggravates a doublepolarisation: between countries and betweenregions within countries. There is a need to knowwhat advantages and disadvantages regionalintegration has for improving the generalconditions of participation in the internationaleconomy, and to identify new mechanisms forsymbolic integration in order to reinforce nationalidentity.

• Integration in regional blocks and their potentialfor dealing with globalisation (neighbours as anopportunity).

• Differences in regional involvement inglobalisation, strategic patterns and implicationsfor harmonising national development.

• Conditions for symbolic national integration (thesense of belonging) and how it relates toparticipation in the international economy.

Culture and communicationTo counter the widespread idea of a global culturethat can be used locally, there is clearly a need toidentify and understand the devices that mark outculture in each reality, when culture is understoodto be a process involving the collectiveconstruction of meanings. We also need to identifyand understand the changes that cultures areundergoing as a result of globalisation’s trends ininformation and technology.

• The mechanisms by which globalisation istransmitted at the national level (production,technology and information networks).

• Communication and its role in the constructionof identities and the empowerment of socialactors.

• The media and local power, as a possible way toachieve symbolic linkages.


10

• Ethnic groups and their response to theglobalisation process.

Social disparities and inequalitiesGlobalisation gives rise to inequalities andincreased polarisation in the distribution of wealth;in the process, exclusion manifests itself in newways. Who is being affected by this process and inwhat ways? That is the question ordering the topicsidentified in this field.

• New inequalities in access to the education andknowledge needed for integration in aninformation society.

• New inequalities in access to productiveresources and markets.

• New exclusion mechanisms preventing theexercise of citizenship.

5.2 Priority actorsThe marking out of research problems wasaccompanied by the identification of prioritysectors. We need to know what possibilities andconstraints both the backward sectors and thedynamic sectors have for linking up with theglobalisation process, taking the economic andpolitical dimensions into account. The workshoptherefore marked out the following productiveactors in order to find out their dynamism andpotential for making links to build up theproductive matrix, interacting in the processes ofanalysis and debate with the whole range of actorsin society:• Small rural producers• Small urban producers• Manufacturing industry• The manufactures export sector (large, medium

and small businesses)• Privatised and capitalised enterprises (services)

5.3 Methodological approach forimplementing the research agenda

The workshop brought together representatives ofdifferent sectors of civil society, the state and theacademic community: research centres, NGOs,labour and business organisations, universities, andstate policy-makers.

The debate during the workshop wascomplemented by the perceptions and views ofother sectors of civil society about the globalisationprocess and its effects. In this sense, it can be statedthat the proposed agenda for research topics wasbuilt by taking into account the demand andstrategic needs for knowledge.

The methodological criteria that should guideresearch are as follows:• Relevance to development at the local, regional

and national levels.• Links with end-users (organisations in the

priority sectors), taking advantage of andcreating new public spaces for debating researchresults.

• Contribution to public awareness, theformulation of public agendas and the debatebetween social actors and policy-makers.

• Quality and multidisciplinarity; links betweenmacro, meso and micro viewpoints.

• Gender focus from the formulation of researchproblems onwards.

6. Follow-up on recommendationsBearing in mind the weak development of researchlinking current processes with the globalisationphenomenon, the workshop’s participants stressedthe relevance of making this issue a particularobject of study from a national and regionalperspective. It is therefore proposed that asystematic effort be made to understand theconditions emerging from the new internationalscenario, its consequences for our countries in theeconomic, social, political and cultural arenas, andthe challenges posed to the state and social actors.

Within this framework, the followingrecommendations were made:• Take the research agenda on board so that it can

be implemented as part of the research centres’agendas.

• Make progress in identifying other similar effortsthat are being made in other Latin Americancountries, in order to initiate a dialogue throughthe electronic media that will make future inter-institutional cooperation possible.

• Continue to hold similar events based on theanalysis of concrete problems and theirexpression in immediate research agendas.

• Request RAWOO to support the implementationof the agenda.

• CEDLA was appointed to systematise theworkshop’s results and recommendations so thatthey can be presented to RAWOO, distributedamongst the participants and circulated in theform of a published document.

7. Evaluation of the workshopFrom the organisers’ point of view, it is importantto stress that the workshop was one of the firstspaces to be organised to analyse, problematise and


11

debate the issues arising from globalisation, itstrends, effects and challenges. It was also apioneering effort to link the local view withreferences to other countries in the region. Forthese reasons, it was introductory and exploratoryin nature, both in terms of finding out whatprogress is being made in discussion of the issuesand the ways in which economic, social, politicaland cultural processes in the South are linked withglobalisation’s trends.

Both the national presentations and the comments,which also took the form of presentations from theparticular viewpoints of other countries in theregion, enabled the issue to be problematised andprovided guidelines for the identification of centralaspects for a research agenda. Because theworkshop emphasised these aspects, althoughtheoretical and conceptual approaches wereincluded in the presentations, they had less weightin the debate. Participants expressed the need toconstruct theoretical and methodological referenceframeworks that will be enriched by researchresults in the process.

The debate was wide-ranging and stimulating,within the limits imposed by a short workshop. Thegroup work and its conclusions faithfully sum upthe main areas of the discussion and add otherswhich, in the opinion of the participants, shouldform part of future discussion and researchagendas.

The conclusions and recommendations for buildinga research agenda were a product of the discussion.This is because, with few exceptions, the presentersand commentators took this aspect of the terms ofreference on board when drafting their papers.

27 people took part in the workshop, includingrepresentatives from different sectors of civilsociety and policy-makers from Bolivia and 4specialists from other countries in the region:Chile, Peru, Argentina and Mexico. All of thembrought knowledge and experiences thatcontributed to achieving the objectives of the event.The number of participants from the businesscommunity and the state was less than envisaged.

In the opinion of the participants, the workshopwas highly enriching and encouraged expectationsand interest in giving continuity to the discussionon this subject. The presentations and commentswere rated as good and five participants judgedthem to be very good or excellent.

The debate and the degree of participation in it wasconsidered to be wide-ranging and good, althoughfour people expressed the opinion that it wasinsufficient and that more time should have beenallocated to discussion.

When asked about relevant issues or aspects thatwere not covered in the presentations andcomments, the participants highlighted thefollowing:• the regional and local perspective in

globalisation• the territorial and spatial dimension; the changes

taking place in urban spaces• regional identities, characteristics and imaginary

constructs in Latin America• the agrarian question• elites and social communication• gender and environmental dimensions

It was also pointed out that there is a need for in-depth reflection on the situation of certainsectors of society such as small urban and ruralproducers, the export sector, women, young peopleand their organisations, as well as the role of thestate in achieving social cohesion. Indirectly, this isan indication of the sectors who should beconsidered as priority subjects in future researchinitiatives.

In general the participants were in agreement instating that the workshop’s objectives were fulfilledadequately and as planned. They also stressed therelevance of the proposed research agenda, with theexception of 3 participants who considered it to berelevant but still too general. Several participantssuggested including the need to develop atheoretical and methodological framework in orderto continue with the discussion. One participantsuggested making progress with this effort on thebasis of research processes and using researchresults to consolidate the construction of our owninterpretation approaches.

Participants were asked to rate the proposedresearch topics and prioritise them in accordancewith a systematic effort to build scientificknowledge. The results of this gave similar priorityratings to all five of the proposed thematic areas. A slightly higher priority rating was given to thoseaspects relating to the role of the state and socialactors within the framework of the changes andeffects produced by globalisation.


12

Report of the consultation of the Dutch researchcommunity on the draft advisory report ‘The needfor research concerning the local response totglobalization in developing countries’, Utrecht,The Netherlands, 26 January 2000

1. Purpose of the meetingThe consultation meeting was organized byRAWOO as part of the preparations of an advisoryreport on the need for research on the impact of andthe local response to globalization processes indeveloping countries. The purpose of the meetingwas to inform interested researchers in theNetherlands on the Council’s initiative in this field,the approach taken and the methods used, and tosolicit the researchers’ views on a draft documentpresenting the outcome of the preparatory activitiesso far.

The meeting was chaired by Professor HansOpschoor, vice chairman of the Council andmember of the Council Committee that preparedthe draft report. A list of participants is attached.

The meeting started off with two shortpresentations by the RAWOO, followed by a roundof questions and clarifications on the part of theCouncil, and thereafter comments and generaldiscussion.

2. Major issues brought forward bythe participants

Country choiceWhat were the reasons for choosing Tanzania andBolivia? What criteria were used? Are thesecountries typical or a-typical when it comes to theimpact of globalization processes on developingcountries? Both Tanzania and Bolivia belong to thegroup of least-developed countries and both areheavily affected by structural adjustment policies.

In a way, the outcome is predetermined by thechoice of the two countries: Tanzania and Bolivia.The question is whether it is possible to generalizeon the basis of these two specific cases. On theother hand, it was emphasized that bringing in theSouthern perspective on globalization issuesthrough the case approach is a strong point andadds a special dimension to the debate. It is alsowhat the present report has to offer in terms ofadded value.

The question was raised whether theimplementation of the research programme would

be restricted to Tanzania and Bolivia, or whetherother countries could be included as well. If thiswould be the case, it was suggested to includecountries where globalization is not onlyexperienced as a problem or a threat but also as anopportunity. In other words, to look at countriesdoing relatively well in terms of coping withglobalization. Such a comparative perspectivecould be valuable and fruitful from the viewpointof learning from experiences and South – Southexchange.

Disentangling the effects of globalization fromother factors affecting development processes

Some participants wondered where globalizationcomes in. The report assumes that the poverty anddevelopment issues which these countries arefacing are related to globalization, but there areother, internal factors impinging on developmentprocesses as well.

Others brought forward that the people at the locallevel are confronted with the effects of productionprocesses being globalized. In a sense, they are the‘recipients’ of globalization processes, which theycannot influence. The question is where the powerbehind these processes lies.

A few participants found that the picture is toogeneral and perhaps too gloomy as well. Generalconcepts, like ‘the South’ and ‘the State’, should beclarified and made more specific. The ‘South’ as aconcept is too general, more differentiation isneeded by countries, sectors and social groups.After all, there are winners and losers ofglobalization.

Other participants observed that the report’s focusis on policies and strategies. But that presupposesthat the problems, the cause and effectrelationships, are known, which is not the case.There is a need to better understand the problemsfirst before jumping to conclusions and policyresponses. It was felt that too little empiricalresearch has been done on the effects ofglobalization on developing countries. Suchresearch must disaggregate and show the impact ofglobalization on various countries, sectors, societalgroups and regions (urban – rural disparities).

Suggestions: (1) disentangle the impact ofglobalization from other, internal factors impingingon development processes; (2) show more clearlyhow the actual problems in Tanzania and Boliviaare related to globalization. As such information is

Consultation of the Dutch research community

1

Annex 5

contained in the workshop documents, it wassuggested to better incorporate this into theadvisory report; (3) put more emphasis on the needfor empirical research on the effects ofglobalization on developing countries, particularlyon the way it affects various countries, sectors,social groups and regions.

Regional perspectiveWhat about a regional perspective? Has that beendiscussed at the workshops? Although bothworkshops focused on the national and sub-national level some attention was paid to theregional level. The issue was brought up, and theworkshop participants in both countries seemed infavour of more regional cooperation, but it was notdiscussed at length. The regional perspective couldalso be relevant from the viewpoint of researchcooperation, taking into account that there arealready several active regional research networks,both in Africa (Codesria, Osrea) and Latin America(Clacso). The African Economic ResearchConsortium, AERC, was mentioned as an exampleof a relatively successful regional network.

Other points• there are not only losers but also winners, i.e.

groups benefiting from globalization (globalnetworks of people living outside their countryof origin, but still strongly related to thesecountries through long-distance nationalism);

• there is a shift from production to consumption, afascination with Western life-styles by elites andmiddle classes;

• the role of the World Trade Organization (WTO).Its policies, for example in agriculture, theservice sector and intellectual property rights,have an enormous impact on developingcountries, while some of these countries are noteven represented. There is an activist perspectiveon WTO policies, but not so much research.Such an international research perspective couldcomplement the country perspective;

• the so-called informal sector is often connectedto the global system through illegal activities,criminality and mining. These illegal activitiesshould be distinguished from other income-generating activities in the informal sector;

• the focus on strategy development and the role ofthe state therein coincides with the currentorthodoxy in World Bank and bilateral donorpolicies, which emphasizes sector wideapproaches, local ownership, and policy dialoguewith the actors and stakeholders concerned in

civil society. How does this fit into the researchagenda?

Structure of the report 33)

There were some comments regarding the structureof the report. It was felt that the balance and thecoherence among the different parts of thedocument could be enhanced. This refers, forexample, to the link between the analytical and theconcluding part, and to the relative weight given tochapters 2 and 3 (chapter 2 is relatively long incomparison with chapter 3, which is contradictoryto the starting points and approach outlined in theintroductory part).

The role of the stateSome participants observed that the report putsmuch emphasis on the role of the state, and less onthe role of civil society at large, including thebusiness sector. Others felt that the emphasis on thestate is right and in line with present developmentthinking in the donor community. The RAWOOsecretariat brings in here that the Council initiallyfocused on local responses to globalization, but thatthe workshop participants in Tanzania particularlystressed the role of the state.

Cultural equilibriumIt is not clear what is meant with the phrase‘cultural equilibrium’ as used in the draft report; asif cultures are static. The theme is meant topinpoint the present debate on cultural identity. Thenotion of counterbalance is in the text, which theparticipants found positive. Other participantsquestioned whether it is necessary to have aspecific theme dealing with globalization andculture. In their view, culture is part of the otherthemes.

A methodological suggestion: chain analysisSome participants suggested to follow chains ofproducts, information and migrants on a globallevel, and to bring the various actors involvedherein together. Such analysis should focus on thesocial groups that are most affected byglobalization, such as women, children and theelderly. The chain concept could perhaps bridge thegap between a global and a context-drivenapproach

The role of Dutch researchersThe observation was made that the role of theDutch research community, or broader the North, inthe proposed research programme is rather vague.It would perhaps be better to explicitly state the

Annex 5. Consultation of the Dutch research community

2

33. The structure of this report was modified following thecomments presented in thisparagraph as well as comments byRAWOO members. The chapternumbers mentioned here do notcorrespond with numbers in thepresent report.

interests of the Northern researchers, in stead ofhiding them. The chair clarified this point bysaying that in the documents presented and theapproach followed the voice of researchers fromthe South was prominent, if not exclusivelylistened to. The reason for conducting this meetingwas to enable the Dutch researchers to give theirviews on the needs for research as expressed in theSouth, and to match these needs with theknowledge and research expertise available in theNetherlands. The RAWOO puts the needs in theSouth first, but Northern researchers still have arole to play when it comes to cooperation.

3. Closing remarksIn his closing remarks the chair emphasized thatRAWOO appreciated the meeting very much.There was a good atmosphere, and a lively and richdebate. The comments and remarks made werecritical but constructive. They could enrich andenhance the Council’s final report, and lead to abetter phrasing. He believed that the meeting hadopened up avenues for cooperation with Dutchresearch groups, when it would come to a researchprogramme.


3

List of participants in the consultation of the Dutch research community on the draft advisory report‘The Need for Research Concerning the Local Responses to Globalization’, Utrecht, 26 January 2000

Name Institution

Netherlands Research CommunityMenno Vellinga Utrecht University Oda van Cranenburgh Leiden University Margriet Poppema Amsterdam University Jan Nederveen Pieterse Institute of Social StudiesRuerd Ruben Wageningen UniversityAlberto Arce Wageningen University Joseph Francois Erasmus University RotterdamRijk van Dijk African Studies CentreCora Govers NWO/WOTROTon Waarts NCDOWim Pelupessy Tilburg UniversityCatherine Hodgkin Royal Tropical Institute – KIT

Ministry of Foreign AffairsHannie Loermans DGIS/DCO/OZ

RAWOOHans Opschoor Institute of Social Studies (Chair meeting)Meghna Guhathakurta Dhaka UniversityAnnemiek Richters Leiden UniversityEd Maan RAWOO SecretariatMarijke Veldhuis RAWOO SecretariatPaul Smits RAWOO SecretariatEduard Jansen RAWOO Secretariat


4

The Need for Research Concerning the Local Response to Globalization in DevelopingCountries, Publication no. 20. September 2000.

Mobilizing Knowledge for Post-ConflictManagement and Development at the Local Level.Publication no. 19. May 2000.

Building bridges in research for development.Review of 1997 and 1998. May 1999.

Information & Communication Technology and Development. RAWOO lectures and seminar.Publication no. 18. August 1998.

Framework for a Philippine-Dutch Programme of Biodiversity Research for Development.Publication no. 17. March 1998.

Developing a Ghanaian-Dutch programme of healthresearch for development. Results of aquestionnaire to identify relevant expertise in theNetherlands and willingness to cooperate withGhana.Publication no. 16. February 1998.

Framework for a Ghanaian-Dutch Programme of Health Research for Development. Publication no. 15. March 1998.

Internal conflicts, security and development.RAWOO lectures and seminar. Edited by Bas de Gaay Fortman and Marijke Veldhuis. Publication no. 14. May 1997.

Towards a European Science and Technologypolicy for development. Publication no. 13. November 1996.

Agenda 21. RAWOO/RMNO lectures onsustainable development. Edited by FransDuijnhouwer and Marijke Veldhuis. Publication no. 12. July 1996.

Research capacity for sustainable development.Report of a field study in Ghana, Kenya and Kerala (India) conducted for RAWOO by Wesley Monroe Shrum, Jr. Publication no. 11. April 1996.

Supporting capacity building for research in theSouth. Recommendations for Dutch policy.Publication no. 10. December 1995.

Building up and strengthening research capacity in Southern countries. A study prepared for the RAWOO by Frits Wils. Publication no. 9. August 1995.

Good Governance. Rawoo Lunchlezingen 1993.Redactie: Oda van Cranenburgh en MarijkeVeldhuis. Publication no. 8. September 1995. (in Dutch).

A medium-term perspective on research fordevelopment. Research needs and Dutch researchcapacity. Publication no. 7. June 1995.

Meerjarenperspectief op onderzoek voorontwikkeling. Onderzoekbehoeften en Nederlandse onderzoekcapaciteit. Publication no. 6. November 1994. (in Dutch).

Development and strengthening of researchcapacity in developing countries. Conference onDonor Support, The Hague, The Netherlands 2-3September 1993. Edited by Marijke Veldhuis.Publication no. 5. June 1994.

Cultuur en ontwikkeling. RAWOO Lunchlezingen 1992. Publication no. 4.Maart 1993. (in Dutch).

Advies inzake de organisatie van het onderzoeks-beleid in het kader van ontwikkelingssamenwerking.Publication no. 3. Augustus 1991. (in Dutch).

Criteria for assessing proposals for research in andfor developing countries. Publication no. 2. August 1991.

Advies over de registratie van ontwikkelingsgerichtonderzoek. Publication no. 1. January 1991. (in Dutch).

Solar Energy Research. Policy paper 3. July 1990.

Industrialisation in Developing Countries. Seminar report. Edited by A.P. Smits. September 1989.

Industrialisation in Developing Countries, priorities and conditions for research. GeneralRecommendations 5. February 1989.

List of RAWOO publications

Sustainable Land Use in Developing Countries;perspectives on an integrated approach. Working paper 2. November 1988.

Food Security in Developing Countries. Seminar report. Edited by A.P. Smits. October 1986.

Towards Autonomy for Women; research andaction to support development process. Working Paper 1. June 1986.

Food Security in Developing Countries, researchneeds and conditions. General Recommendations 4.January 1986.

International Dimensions of Development Problems.Seminar reports. Edited by H.J. Mastebroek. 1984.

Legal Aspects of International Dimensions ofDevelopment Problems; research needs andpriorities. General Recommendations 3a. June1984.

International Dimensions of DevelopmentProblems; research needs and priorities. General Recommendations 3. October 1983.

Energy for Survival. General Recommendations 2.January 1984 (abridged English version).

Health and Illness in Developing Countries.General Recommendations 1. January 1984(abridged English version).

List of RAWOO publications

coping with globalization

Documents