41 research outputs found
The European Unionâs role in the world and the social dimension of globalisation
This discussion paper is based upon a multidisciplinary academic workshop held at DINĂMIA â Research Centre on Socio-Economic Change, Lisbon on 2-3 March that explored the nature of the external impact of the EU in relation to the social dimension of globalisation. In its widest sense, the social dimension of globalisation concerns the effects on people and societies of the globalisation of economic systems internationally. This workshop focussed largely on themes such as labour standards, decent work, employment, gender, health and human rights.
In the current role as the holder of the EU Presidency, Portugal has an important role to play in relation to the EUâs external role; this document provides an overview to orient future actions. Given that the globalisation phenomenon is highly contested in public debate, focussing on its social dimension could provide a way in which to humanise globalisation and diffuse concern. It could, quite simply, legitimise the EUâs role in the world, particularly given the putative European social model, and the fact that the EU is a potentially powerful player in this context.
EU initiatives in this area involve development, international relations, trade, governance and other policies, as well as indirect diffusion of social issues. Overall, the best approaches are those that combine different policies and both soft and hard approaches; that are coherent with internal EU policies; and in which social goals are consistent with trade and foreign policy goals. Geographical consistency is also necessary and, further, the role of the various actors should be clearly identified, both in terms of EU institutions and in relation to non-EU actors.
Currently there are lacks in consistency and coherence, as well as doubts as to the EUâs commitment, ability and success in promoting the social dimension of globalisation. On the other hand, opportunities clearly exist, not least because the effects of globalisation are largely positive. This is an area in which further attention from both policy-makers and academics should be focussed, particularly in relation to the questions surrounding the success of programmes and policies, their coherence and consistency, the perspective of the developing world, and the involvement of civil society actors. Further, in practical terms, a periodic assessment report addressing the EUâs role in relation to the social dimension of globalisation and an international forum on the subject could usefully raise the profile of the EUâs external role in relation to the social dimension of globalisation and provide the first step in the next stage of this project
South Korea's automotive labour regime, Hyundai Motorsâ global production network and tradeâbased integration with the European Union
This article explores the interrelationship between global production networks(GPNs) and free trade agreements (FTAs) in the South Korean auto industry and its employment relations. It focuses on the production network of the Hyundai Motor Group (HMG) â the third biggest automobile manufacturer in the world â and the FTA between the EU and South Korea. This was the first of the EUâs ânew generationâ FTAs, which among other things contained provisions designed to protect and promote labour standards. The articleâs argument is twofold. First, that HMGâs production network and Koreaâs political economy (of which HMG is a crucial part) limited the possibilities for the FTAâs labour provisions to take effect. Second, that the commercial provisions in this same FTA simultaneously eroded HMGâs domestic market and corporate profitability, leading to adverse consequences for auto workers in the more
insecure and low-paid jobs. In making this argument, the article advances a multiscalar conceptualization of the labour regime as an analytical intermediary between GPNs and FTAs. It also provides one of the first empirical studies of the EUâSouth Korea FTA in terms of employment relations, drawing on 105 interviews with trade unions, employer associations, automobile companies and state officials across both parties
Europeanisation should meet international constructivism: the Nordic Plus group and the internalisation of political conditionality by France and the United Kingdom
This article is a plausibility probe for the significance of international constructivist âmediating factorsâ to explain variation in Europeanisation outcomes. It applies a most similar systems design (or Mill's method of difference) to show that the UK has internalised political conditionality to a larger extent than France at least partially because it has been the object of stronger socialisation pressures within the âNordic Plusâ group. The article contributes to the literature on Europeanisation and development cooperation in two important ways. First, it enlarges its scope of analysis, both geographically (beyond new European Union member states) and thematically (beyond simple measures of aid quality and/or quantity). Second, it emphasises the importance of international (versus domestic) mediating factors. The empirical analysis focusses on three cases of aid sanctions in response to human rights abuses and democratic setbacks: Zimbabwe 2002, Madagascar 2009 and Mozambique 2009
The European Union's role in the world and the social dimension of globalization
This discussion paper is based upon a multidisciplinary academic workshop held at DINĂMIA â Research Centre on Socio-Economic Change, Lisbon on 2-3 March that explored the nature of the external impact of the EU in relation to the social dimension of globalisation. In its widest sense, the social dimension of globalisation concerns the effects on people and societies of the globalisation of economic systems internationally. This workshop focussed largely on themes such as labour standards, decent work, employment, gender, health and human rights.
In the current role as the holder of the EU Presidency, Portugal has an important role to play in relation to the EUâs external role; this document provides an overview to orient future actions. Given that the globalisation phenomenon is highly contested in public debate, focussing on its social dimension could provide a way in which to humanise globalisation and diffuse concern. It could, quite simply, legitimise the EUâs role in the world, particularly given the putative European social model, and the fact that the EU is a potentially powerful player in this context.
EU initiatives in this area involve development, international relations, trade, governance and other policies, as well as indirect diffusion of social issues. Overall, the best approaches are those that combine different policies and both soft and hard approaches; that are coherent with internal EU policies; and in which social goals are consistent with trade and foreign policy goals. Geographical consistency is also necessary and, further, the role of the various actors should be clearly identified, both in terms of EU institutions and in relation to non-EU actors.
Currently there are lacks in consistency and coherence, as well as doubts as to the EUâs commitment, ability and success in promoting the social dimension of globalisation. On the other hand, opportunities clearly exist, not least because the effects of globalisation are largely positive. This is an area in which further attention from both policy-makers and academics should be focussed, particularly in relation to the questions surrounding the success of programmes and policies, their coherence and consistency, the perspective of the developing world, and the involvement of civil society actors. Further, in practical terms, a periodic assessment report addressing the EUâs role in relation to the social dimension of globalisation and an international forum on the subject could usefully raise the profile of the EUâs external role in relation to the social dimension of globalisation and provide the first step in the next stage of this project