Global civil society: changing the world?

Is, as many of its enthusiastic proponents suggest, global civil society the key to future progressive politics? This paper first develops a definition of global civil society and explores the circumstances that have prompted its growth. The paper then considers the consequences of global civil society, particularly in relation to matters of sovereignty, identity, citizenship and democracy. The latter part of the paper proceeds to outline criteria for evaluating global civil society, identifying seven areas of promise and four possible dangers. The conclusion offers several suggestions that could help to maximise the benefits and minimise the pitfalls of global civil society

Civil society and legitimation of global governance

Along with the general intensified globalisation of social relations in contemporary history has come an unprecedented expansion of regulatory apparatuses that cover planetary jurisdictions and constituencies. On the whole, however, this global governance remains weak relative to pressing current needs for global public policy. Shortfalls in moral standing, legal foundations, material delivery, democratic credentials and charismatic leadership have together generated large legitimacy deficits in existing global regimes. This fragile overall legitimacy has in turn constituted a major obstacle to achieving the substantial further growth of global-scale regulation that is required to secure decent human lives for all in a more global world. Insufficient capacities for global governance and insufficient legitimacy of global governance are thus coupled in damaging mutual reinforcement. This paper argues that – although there are of course considerable variations across different global governance institutions and different civil society initiatives – the general picture has been one of but partially realised potentials of legitimacy promotion. Like the tip of the proverbial iceberg, civil society activities concerning global regulation have so far made visible only a fraction of the total mass of possibilities. Hence prescriptions for the future centre on ‘more’ and ‘better’. Regarding more quantity, urgently required greater positive legitimation of global governance can be promoted with more civil society engagement, covering more regulatory institutions and extending through more stages of the policy process. Regarding better quality, to have greater positive legitimation effects civil society relations with global governance generally need to be more inclusive, more competent, more coordinated, and more accountable. Both sides to the interchange – civil society associations on the one hand and global regulatory bodies on the other – can take a range of measures to further these ends

Globalisation studies past and future: a dialogue of diversity

This report summarises the proceedings of an interdisciplinary and intercultural roundtable held at CSGR in February 2003 to assess the past development and future prospects of globalisation studies. The discussions focused on three general questions: namely, definitions of globalisation; methodologies of globalisation studies; and normative challenges facing academic research on globalisation. The paper compiles the perspectives on these three issues of 27 participants heralding from 15 countries and a dozen fields of study

What is globalization? The definitional issue - again

Knowledge of globalization is substantially a function of how the concept is defined. After tracing the history of ‘global’ vocabulary, this paper suggests several principles that should inform the way globality (the condition) and globalization (the trend) are defined. On this basis four common conceptions of the term are rejected in favour of a fifth that identifies globalization as the spread of transplanetary – and in recent times more particularly supraterritorial – connections between people. Half a dozen qualifications are incorporated into this definition to distinguish it from globalist exaggerations

Civil society and democracy in global governance

Recent years have witnessed substantial civil society mobilisation on questions of global governance. This paper considers the implications of this development for democracy. After specifying concepts of ‘civil society’, ‘democracy’, ‘globality’ and ‘governance’, the paper identifies deep democratic deficits that have emerged as a consequence of contemporary globalisation. The discussion then outlines various ways that civil society can either enhance or undermine democracy in the governance of global relations

Globalization and governance: from statism to polycentrism

This paper explores the implications of globalization for governance. It argues that the contemporary large-scale and accelerated growth of transworld connectivity has rendered the statist mode of governance unviable and encouraged the emergence of polycentric (multi-sited and networked) regulation. States remain crucial nodes in this polycentric governance, although globalization has spurred several important shifts in their attributes. Meanwhile, globalization has opened considerable possibilities for substate (municipal and provincial) authorities to engage directly with realms beyond their state. Inadequacies of the state as a sole site for the governance of global relations have also promoted a growth of suprastate (regional and transworld) sites of regulation. In addition, contemporary globalization and the currently prevailing neoliberal policy framework have encouraged a major expansion of private sites of governance. Civil society has followed the trend from statism to polycentrism by shifting its focus from the state alone to a multi-layered and diffuse governance apparatus

Political parties and global democracy

This paper examines the place of political parties and party systems in providing democracy for the more global world of the twenty-first century. It argues that recent intense globalisation has by no means rendered poilitical parties and party systems irrelevant. However, political parties have lost substantial democratic impact by failing to move on with today's more global times. Parties could regain considerable stature as democratic forces if they altered a number of practices in line with emergent polycentric governance of a more global world. The paper advances a number of suggestions that could concurrently address the general stagnancy of political parties and the overall underdevelopment of global democracy

Governing global finance

This paper examines the regulation of global finance. It first identifies the forms and extents of contemporary financial globalization: that is, how monetarily denominated savings and investments now increasingly move in transworld spaces. A range of evidence is cited to indicate that finance has acquired a very substantial global character. The second section of the paper reviews the various institutional mechanisms that currently serve to govern global finance. This regulation is shown to be multilayered and diffuse: across local, national, regional and global levels; and across public and private sectors. The third section considers the effectiveness of present regulatory arrangements, with reference to criteria of efficiency, stability, social equity, ecological integrity and democracy. Current frameworks are found to be seriously wanting on all of these counts. Finally, the paper assesses future challenges and prospects in the governance of global finance. It is argued here that considerably more proactive and socially progressive public regulation of global finance is possible and desirable

Civil society and IMF accountability

This paper examines in what ways and to what extent civil society activities have made the International Monetary Fund answerable to those whom it affects. It is argued that various types of civil society associations have used multiple kinds of tactics to advance IMF accountability on a number of occasions, particularly in relation to certain matters such as transparency, debt relief and social concerns. However, the overall scale of these contributions has remained modest to date, so that civil society has only partly closed the significant accountability gaps that are found at the Fund. Moreover, civil society relations with the IMF have often been rather hegemonic, in the sense that the accountability secured through these citizen channels has, on the whole, flowed disproportionately to dominant countries and social circles, rather than to subordinate countries and social strata who generally experience the greatest accountability deficits vis-à-vis the Fund. The need for future improvements in IMF accountability is therefore not only to nurture more civil society activities in respect of the institution, but also more civil society initiatives that directly engage, and are themselves more accountable to, marginalised countries and social groups

The WTO and civil society

In line with a general trend in contemporary global governance, the World Trade Organization has been developing increased links with civil society groups. If conducted well, these contacts can make important contributions towards greater effectiveness and democracy in the global trade regime. If handled poorly, however, the relations can undermine policy and undercut democracy. Already the WTO and civic associations have taken notable steps to increase the quantity and quality of their mutual exchanges. Yet major resource constraints and deeper structural impediments have to date prevented a fuller development of this dialogue