Globalising resistance: social movement activism in Malawi

Attendant with the rise of the good governance discourse of the 1990s and beyond, contemporary research on social activism in Africa has tended to be rooted in normalised conceptions of civil society operating in partnership with the state. The proliferation of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) over this period has attracted considerable attention from international donors and researchers alike – so much so that, for many, NGOs have now become synonymous with civil society. As a consequence, considerable gaps are evident in the literature on social movement activism and what this means in specific African contexts. Drawing from an empirical study of political and social activism in Malawi over a six year period (2000-2006), this paper aims at making a contribution in this regard, focusing on the agency and activism of a civic network of organisations and individuals known as the Malawi Economic Justice Network (MEJN). Arguing that MEJN constitutes a social movement in that it embodies many of the associated characteristics identified within literature (a decentralised structure; an emphasis on popular participation and direct democracy; a dynamic membership; and a strong internal solidarity (Pichardo, 1997; della Porta and Diani, 1999; della Porta, 2009), the paper follows the journey of the network – from its genesis within the Jubilee campaign for debt cancellation, to its consolidation through the Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS) process, to its fragmentation with the attraction of donor funding, to its re-invigoration through challenges posed by its local district membership base – and identifies both the enabling factors and the constraints to its success in effecting social and political change over this time. MEJN’s experience and journey demonstrates the increasingly globalised nature of African social movement activism and highlights both the opportunities and constraints to strategies for change posed by this globalisation

In-active citizenship and the depoliticisation of community development in Ireland

At a time of rising stress for communities, families and individuals coupled with a growing disillusionment with government, the concept of ‘active citizenship’ has arrived as a salve to many of the social ills of our time. Emphasising citizen’s own responsibilities, and espousing values of solidarity, community and neighbourliness, active citizenship embodies all that is good, rendering it somewhat immune from criticism. While agreeing that community values of solidarity and neighbourliness are indeed critical, this paper takes issue with what it argues is a significant revisioning of the three core concepts embodied within active citizenship - citizenship, social capital and community development - and argues that active citizenship, as it is currently promoted by state and select civil society organisations alike, substitutes self-help for redistribution and self-reliance for state accountability, in the process depoliticising the principles and practice of community development and denying community actors a voice in their own development

In from the margins: development and internationalisation within Irish universities

Universities in Ireland, as elsewhere, are under severe pressure – indeed in crisis according to some commentators. The nature of this crisis is two-fold. First, increasing enrolment figures coupled with dwindling state support leaves universities facing severe financial challenges. Second, and perhaps more critically, the very idea and fundamental role of the university is being challenged through the shifting nature of knowledge(s) and the changing needs of an increasingly complex global society. University “internationalisation” policies and strategies, in remaining narrowly focused on raising revenue through fee-paying international students, are missing valuable opportunities for addressing these wider challenges. Despite the rapidly changed nature of society in Ireland, recent surveys indicate that graduates remain poorly equipped with the skills and knowledge to engage meaningfully with contemporary global issues both at home (e.g. migration, multiculturalism) and abroad (e.g. global trade policy, causes of civil unrest). In the context of broader debates on the role of and function of universities within contemporary globalised societies, this paper argues for a broadening of the conception and resultant strategies of internationalisation to include a mainstreaming of development education so that Irish universities become more adept at fulfilling their mandates of equipping students with a set of knowledge, skills and values to allow them to contribute more fully and meaningfully to economic, political and social life, both at home and abroad. Drawing on the preliminary results of empirical research conducted by the Irish-African Partnership for Research Capacity Building within all nine universities on the island, the paper highlights both opportunities and constraints to such a mainstreaming. At a time when Irish universities face growing competition in the increasingly diverse field of knowledge production, and at a time when Ireland’s 0.7 per cent commitment is under threat, this paper offers some practical pointers for developing a greater global responsiveness and engagement within the Irish higher education sector

'But you can't compare Malawi and Ireland!' - shifting boundaries in a globalised world

Although global influences - in the form of international finance coupled with discourses of partnership, participation, good governance, and democracy - exercise an increasing influence on national and local governance arrangements worldwide, comparative studies across the traditional South/North divide remain extremely rare. Drawing on findings from a comparative study of Malawi's PRSP and Ireland's national Social Partnership process, this article demonstrates that a shifting of conceptual boundaries beyond traditionally delineated geographic borders is not just valid but essential, in that it helps to reveal new perspectives on the politics underlying globalised development processes and the transformative potential of those processes

What Do We Know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?

The goal of this paper is to identify key issues concerning the nature of competition in health care markets and its impacts on quality and social welfare and to identify pertinent findings from the theoretical and empirical literature on this topic. The theoretical literature in economics on competition and quality, the theoretical literature in health economics on this topic, and the empirical findings on competition and quality in health care markets are surveyed and their findings assessed. Theory is clear that competition increases quality and improves consumer welfare when prices are regulated (for prices above marginal cost), although the impacts on social welfare are ambiguous. When firms set both price and quality, both the positive and normative impacts of competition are ambiguous. The body of empirical work in this area is growing rapidly. At present it consists entirely of work on hospital markets. The bulk of the empirical evidence for Medicare patients shows that quality is higher in more competitive markets. The empirical results for privately insured patients are mixed across studies.

What Do We Know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?

The goal of this paper is to identify key issues concerning the nature of competition in health care markets and its impacts on quality and social welfare and to identify pertinent findings from the theoretical and empirical literature on this topic. The theoretical literature in economics on competition and quality, the theoretical literature in health economics on this topic, and the empirical findings on competition and quality in health care markets are surveyed and their findings assessed. Theory is clear that competition increases quality and improves consumer welfare when prices are regulated (for prices above marginal cost), although the impacts on social welfare are ambiguous. When firms set both price and quality, both the positive and normative impacts of competition are ambiguous. The body of empirical work in this area is growing rapidly. At present it consists entirely of work on hospital markets. The bulk of the empirical evidence for Medicare patients shows that quality is higher in more competitive markets. The empirical results for privately insured patients are mixed across studies.

What Do We know About Competition and Quality in Health Care Markets?

The goal of this paper is to identify key issues concerning the nature of competition in health care markets and its impacts on quality and social welfare and to identify pertinent findings from the theoretical and empirical literature on this topic. The theoretical literature in economics on competition and quality, the theoretical literature in health economics on this topic, and the empirical findings on competition and quality in health care markets are surveyed and their findings assessed. Theory is clear that competition increases quality and improves consumer welfare when prices are regulated (for prices above marginal cost), although the impacts on social welfare are ambiguous. When firms set both price and quality, both the positive and normative impacts of competition are ambiguous. The body of empirical work in this area is growing rapidly. At present it consists entirely of work on hospital markets. The bulk of the empirical evidence for Medicare patients shows that quality is higher in more competitive markets. The empirical results for privately insured patients are mixed across studies.competition,health care,quality,antitrust,