1. The Windows Man
1.2 Social Justice?
2.2 Globalization and Social Protection
2.3 Social Justice after Globalization
2.4 The lack of an analytic base
2.5 A problem of method
3.2 Critique and Nostalgia: Bretton Woods is dead
3.3 Towards a new paradigm - Neo-Industrialism and Supply Side Equity
4.2 Social Europe - A Regime Under Constrution
4.3 Social Europe and Neo-Industrialism: the issues in debate
4.2 Gaps in the debate - what has not been said
Macau, 6/December/1997
[ Master's Degree Project of European Law ]
[ Professor Doutor Miguel Poiares MADURO ]
1.1 Globalization?
Nature is Global in every sense.
Is there a political or economic frontier for a bird?
In fact, at the very beginig Man had no barriers, only the Family concept
like in many basic animal formats... but, today, even that is becoming
upside down.
For centuries Man made casttles, frontiers and barriers,
of any kind, to protect himself against animals, nature and other Man.
One day, He found that it was alone, inside its 'Black
Box'. And He decided to open one window, later two...
... and again the Spiral in motion...
Power will always exist. It is a form of potential energy.
And can have many forms: financial, political, legislative, military, force,
atomic, electrical, ...
Nature clearly proves that potential difference is a
pure fact.
As a result, there are men (individuals, or organizations,
or countries) with much more power than others.
Social Justice must protect the less powerful entities of nature from the more powerful ones.
Is this a pure energectical problem? What is the reaction
of nature when there are large potential differences?
2.1 Globalization Definition
* NO: Deep Economic (political) Integration.
* NO: Globalization is a process to reduce economic borders.
* HOW: Uniformity in Economic policies worldwide, and
'regulatory competition'? Yes! But how?
* NO: Globalization is a condition that magnifies forces
to break down barriers.
* 'Deep Integration' as a negative effect on public policies
and programs: full employment, workers rights,
Health care, social welfare, ... Why?
* Limit the fiscal and monetary policies.
* Difficult to raise taxes.
* Difficult to lower labor standards and wages.
* Difficult to stay competitive.
* Social dumping
*The Euro-pessimists:
* 'Embedded Liberalism' created by the Bretton Woods
agreement (School), 'golden age' 1950-1973.
* Europe will weaken social policies of the member states...
and undermines the social welfare.
* The European union supra-national institutions will
lack social policy.
* In North America 'The International Forum on Globalization'
to protect threats to economy, environment, communities, human rights,
equity, and democracy.
'Nostalgia and Resistance' is important but we must move
on to deep integration.
NO: Globalization is not a disease... we must go on and
look for great efficiency.
How about Equity?
NO: Can we have Social Protection after Globalization?
Can you guess the Future by reading old books? May be...
Three ways:
* Globalization is a new utopia that will spread to all
world.
* 'Nostalgia and rhetoric of resistance' deeply pessimistic
about the fate of social democracy.
* Understanding of the positive aspects of economic globalization
and a critical appraisal of its social costs.
HOW: Global Commitments to social equity, and international
problem-solving. Pragmatism and realistic politics. Reinvent national,
regional and global Governance to accomodate globalization and social equity
and cohesion.
A new political/economic paradigm... nobody knows exactly
what to do.
But man is good on solving this types of problems: ZERO
DECISION, let's wait and see...
3.1 Global Utopia
* Neo-liberals welcome globalization.
* Less government, no barriers mean perfect markets,
so more efficient allocations.
* More efficiency and maximization of welfare.
* Welfare benifits promised by an international division
of labor based on comparative advantadges.
* NO: Global capital market will discipline the nations
and ensure markets are not distorced.
* Capital will flow wherever returns are highest.
* NO: Markets will provide all the social pretection
needed.
(i) Embedded Liberalism:
* Domestic laissez-faire, state intervention, delink
from world economy.
* With Free Capital Movements & Footless Firms, governments
could not use interest rates or taxes to promote employment or pay the
welfare.
* So, governments have been acting as capital transaction
buffers between local and international economies. They were still able
to secure the welfare benefits.
* Exchange rates served as key buffers.
* NO: The system was protecting the social welfare.
* Up to the 70's it was a "virtuous circle". But, we
had marginalized countries...
(ii) The end of embedded liberalism:
* Capital mobility & footless firms increased the
dispersal of production, have created difficulties to state regulations.
* Mexican crisis, now the Asian crisis are a proof of
the weakness of national economies to capital fast flows.
* markets (Multi-nationals) are now much stronger than
the majority of states financial power.
* No more full employment concepts.
* Price stabiliby become more important than full employment
(significant unemployment).
* NO: Competitiveness is the "Golden Rule", every country
is trying to produce "Economic Global Warriors" to win the global economic
Battle.
* NO: So states are cutting, and using, social welfare
funds to maximize efficiency.
* New international division of labor, dispersed manufecturers
through out the World seeking for low labor cost countries.
* The states are trying their best to atract capital
investors.
* Can embedded liberalism go on?
* HOW: Supply side measures as the primary means to ensure
social equity.
* HOW: high wages maintaining competition and social
welfare.
*@: Both are theorycal dreams, or short time methodologies because everybody is trying to make the same: The New Economic Global Warriors. And at the end the states that, NOW, have more power will be the winners!!!
* NO: Wolfgang Streeck, German sociologist, Welfare Plan - even he believes Europe will not care enouph. Just because the World is not only Europe...
(i) The Positive Vision:
* To foster neo-industrial patterns of production to
remain competitive.
* Diversified quality production, flexible specialization
* NO: Maintaining high wages due to quality, can sustain
social equity.
* SECRETS: High skilled flexible workforce, sophisticated
technology, even on IT. Training, good education. Of courses everybody
is already trying that...
* MUST: The Neo-industrial strategy can work to reduce
the impact of globalization on social welfare and equity and focus on the
Institutional Conditions necessary for neo-industrialism.
(ii) The Legal Foundations of Neo-industrialism:
* NO: Important institutional preconditions are needed
to regulate competitiveness.
* NO: Institutional arrangements to convince companies
to go for high wages, better legal environments.
* The Legal Foudation of neo-industrialism is needed.
But the EU cannot (??) create the legal framework basis.
(iii) The Exo-Skelton
* The neo-industrialism requires a hard, formal, public
legal "Exo-Skelton".
* Mandatory legal rules and a strong role of the state
are the basis of Good neo-industrialism. Some legal aspects, the Streeck
Exo-Skelton:
- Garantee effective unions;
-NO: Require industry-level and uniform wages;
- Mandate co-determination from boardroom to shop floor;
-NO: Guarantee long-term job security;
- Ensure regular training;
- Provide for effective dialogue between capital and
workers with the state as a regulator.
* @ Competition Regulation is more important than everything.
* @ Permanent training and very good education.
* @ Strong regulation on welfare company obligations.
* @ Protect Strongly the Basic Foundamental rights: very
low, low, costs for basic food, for social housing, for health services
and very high quality EDUCATION.
* @ Teachers must be considerer the most important people
in Society (I am not a teacher...).
(iv)
An alternative approach-neo-industrialism via soft law,
contract, regional government, and private governance.
* There are some cases of neo-industrial excellence,
and this accurred in countries without neo-industrial legal skeltons. So,
even the local municipal support can have an important role...
(v)
Conclusion: Neo-industrial in one market?
* NO: If Europe can implement a legal-institutional framework
that dream will be possible.
* NO: Why Streeck does not think that Europe is going
to implement it??? Does he believe in what he is praying? I don't think
so...
* @ Competition Regulation is more important than everything.
* @ Permanent training and very good education.
* @ Strong regulation on welfare company obligations.
* @ Protect Strongly the Basic Foundamental rights: very
low, low, costs for basic food, for social housing, for health services
and very high quality EDUCATION.
* @ Teachers must be considerer the most important people
in Society.
* Social Justice after Globalization???
* The Social Europe, a Union wide regime. There is an
open debate about it.
4.1 The need for a "Regime"
* NO: There is a need to make a complex framework to sustain the neo-industrialism
* Yes! This the way to go... There is an enormous need
to have a supra-national regimes for coordination of social (welfare, safety,
health, education) national policies.
* Please, no regimes...
* What must the Union do to ensure that the conditions for neo-industrialism are preserved and spread throughout Europe?
* Can an intergovernamental regime provide needed support, or are supra-national or truly arrangements necessary?
* Is the Union structurally and constitutionally capable of performing such functions?
* How likely is it that the union will take the necessary measures in the near future?
* How to colect money from companies/business to pay the Social Welfare?
(i)
Éuropessimism
Streeck in fact is the key of Euro-pessimism... or may
be it is a strategy to impose its ideas?!
(ii)
Euro-optimism
Positive thinking is the best way when we don't know
what is going to happen.
But, but, but... it is time to concentrate already on
the Social problems that we already have!!!
* Difficulties to create social regimes for social protection.
* Streeck has no strategy at all, but he explained
well the German case.
* The enormous differences between the poorest and richest
countries in Europe will make things even more difficult.
* IT IS NOT ONLY THE POLICAL NEEDS THAT WILL MAKE THINGS
CHANGE... THE ECONOMIC 'MONSTERS' ARE SOMETIMES MANIPULATING THE POLITICAL
POWER...
Governments must concentrate, exclusively, on the Social
Justice of their country citizens. And in legal frameworks to make the
private organizations to pay that Social Justice 100%...
Even if these firms are operating directly from Mars.
This Presentation was a clear example of Globalization and Social InJustice.
Globalization because it was made directly on the Internet and
presented online to our Macau International European Studies Institute
(IEEM) Master's students and European Law teacher, and at the same time,
could, AND CAN, be seen worldwide over the NET.
On the other side it was pure Social Injustice, because my other
two coleagues - TONI, from mainland Popular Republic of China and SIMON,
from Macau Statistics Department - did not have the same resources as me
to make their presentations on the same topic. In fact they used the whiteboard
and paper to present their work, and I used a overhead projector with a
computer connected online to the Internet.
Does this mean that my presentation was better than them? No! Of course
not!!
So, let me congratulate you two guys (Simon and Toni), forever, for
the nice and great presentations you have made.
Thank you Professor Miguel Maduro.
| Games | Shopping | Travel | Health | Fashion | Consulting | News | Search | Casino |