< Back - Article List - Next >

2.2. GLOBALISATION – a political perspective. It focuses on the OECD
<http://www.ulaval.ca/BI/Globalisation-Universities/pages/actes/Chris-W-Brooks.pdf> Chris W. Brooks , Director, Public Affairs and Communication, OCDE

The subject of this conference is globalization, and this of course is very difficult because this word is never defined. To some, globalization is the cause of all evil, including the fact that the kitchen sink no longer works. To others, it is a panacea for a brave new world. Globalization is a process which is essentially about increased interdependence, and a better terminology would be to talk about global interdependence, and perhaps to sometimes talk about global disfunctioning in terms of dependence and interdependence.

This would provide some focus to and analysis of the problems, which are mainly discussed from an economic perspective. Economic integration has accelerated, particularly in terms of trade and in relation to the traditional industrial economy (the movement of goods and raw materials), it has also dramatically accelerated in financial terms. It is now becoming positive in terms of human mobility and in terms of migration. However, it also brings about a large number of problems in terms of human migration and the willingness and capacity of different parts of the globe to receive or accept people of different religions or nationalities. However, most importantly, interdependence is a question of political independence. We must be careful about the word globalization and particularly about the terminology we use, for we are in a period of mutation, with multiplying uncertainty everywhere. Under these circumstances, one catch-all evil, or one simple ideological quick-fix will not get us very far in making good policy.

It is also important to understand, and particularly to practice and repeat, that this process of interdependence - global interdependence and global disequilibria - is not a choice, but a fact of life. It is something which is here and which will not easily go away. It is a dynamic which we cannot simply refuse to recognise.

Likewise, it is also important in any discussions regarding what is at stake for universities in relation to globalization to apprehend carefully what is known as, at least in the press, as the anti-globalization movement. This is not a movement at all. It is an unsustainable coalition of different interests. Within it, there are two important tendencies which must be distinguished. The first consists of those who are angry about the distributive outcomes of a global world, and who are concerned about the lack of progress on development in developing countries. They are concerned about the equity agenda, and the OECD feels very close to that group of people. We live in a world where results have not matched very closely to public rhetoric.

There is a second part of this movement which one could call an anti-modernist movement. We may well be entering the period of the end of enlightenment, and a dark side to progress may lay before us, but to deny modernism would be rather dangerous. In this context, the apparent suggestion by the anti-modernism movement that we have left behind us a golden age which global interdependence is somehow closing out, is perilous. Those who share this view should go back and read and reflect somewhat more seriously on our economic history.

Within the group of countries which make up the OECD, it would appear that economic development based on the rules of open-markets have actually produced quite satisfying results in the post-war period in a number of important respects, such as life expectancy, education levels, housing standards, working hours, income distribution within OECD countries and income levels. This can be looked at from many perspectives; however, it would therefore appear that this has been a prosperous and positive period. It is certainly not necessarily one which is going to continue automatically following a linear growth path.

There are two important aspects of the future which must be reflected upon. The first is that it would seem that developed countries have reached the end of one cycle of development. The twenty-first century will obviously accelerate the new economy and the information technology society, but more than ever it will be the century of biology, and it is here that there will be many mutations, which again bring with them many problems which need to be examined.

In the anti-globalization movement, the reaction towards genetic manipulation, both in pharmaceuticals and in agriculture, is marked largely, not by scientific rigour and calmness, but by irrationality. In this respect, universities and university academics have an extremely important role to play in attempting to bring about a rational discussion between the rich affluent world which may not need innovations in genetics, particularly in agriculture, and a developing world which may be able to profit from them in a fundamentally more positive way. The current climate of suspicion serves as a clear example of the irrationality which reigns in a debate generated in large part by fear, ignorance and uncertainty.

From the point of view of the OECD, the critical challenge posed by globalization is to establish some rules which could be termed the "new economic and financial rules of the game", primarily in areas such as bribery and corruption, governance, public and private, and trade. And these problems of bribery and corruption of public officials in foreign trade must be resolved; this will not be easy. The OECD's convention dealing with this issue represents a first step in a very long battle to try and introduce some elements of transparency and fairness in the abovementioned areas, which of course becomes very difficult when the discussion turns to issues such as the armaments industry, development finance, as well as other areas of publicly induced trade.

Corporate governance represents a very significant area, and involves setting new global standards or best practices for corporate governance. This issue has been accelerated by such problems as those which have recently been witnessed both in the United States and Europe. What are, perhaps ephemerally, called harmful tax practices constitute a critical aspect of this work, and essentially involves tax cheating. This is an extremely important area where rules of the game are absolutely necessary and must be internationally agreed in order to ensure that the rule of law is equally respected by all citizens who have to pay taxes. Unless this work is rigorously pursued, the capacity of government revenues to be sustained will be seriously eroded.

Obviously one of the current focuses of the OECD is on terrorism, which is natural given the Organisation's membership. However, there are other issues of major importance, such as dealing with organized crime and drugs on a global scale. Therefore, building global rules of the game, or developing what could be termed soft law constitutes the main business of the OECD. This soft law will then of course be ratified, or not, by national parliaments, and it may actually end up constituting the sort of global standards which become ratified around the world in different bodies, and are taken up within different parts of United Nations family.

But a very important issue which the OECD must concentrate on is the organization of a framework through which globalization can be dealt with, and within which education will have a major role to play. Kofi Annan helped this process tremendously in Johannesburg a few weeks ago by providing some structure and focus to the issue of what sustainable development is. His priorities are water, energy, health, agriculture and biodiversity, which are very important issues.

Though there is not sufficient time at this juncture to talk about the adequacy of the structure of international organizations generally, and their capacity to meet up to the agenda set by Kofi Annan, the majority would probably agree that the current structure of these institutions is inadequate, and that curiously we live in a world where international institutions are increasingly challenged at a moment when they were never so important. The issues at stake in international negotiations are so important. The OECD will be central in the process of dealing with those five agenda points, and perhaps a sixth. Firstly because the OECD represents 60% of world output and the OECD countries command roughly 80% of the world's economic resources, create roughly 95% of the world's technology and are responsible for 95% of basic scientific research. In these areas, the interaction and importance of higher education institutions in OECD member countries is extremely significant. We must make progress on the agenda set out by Kofi Annan.

The first priority is to put development issues squarely at the centre of the agendas of developed countries. There is too much hype and not enough action, and the coherence of national policy is lacking. There is too much parading along the catwalk and not enough serious attention being paid to the real coordination of overseas development aid and, most importantly, on the conditions necessary for foreign and direct investment flows. But this - however nearly the 0.7 agenda is meet - will of itself not be enough. Foreign direct investment is absolutely crucial if we are to deal with global imbalances because this involves not only the money, but also the technology flow, and this therefore represents a clear focus on which we must make progress.

In addition to looking at investment capital flows, international trade is an extremely important issue, and developed countries will obviously have to address the question of the opening up of their markets. In this context, agriculture is going to be a critical area, and this will be a major agenda item, both for the World Trade Organization, and also the World Bank. But if we are serious about global equity, developed countries opening their market will be a requirement in order to achieve progress.

Addressing gaps in scientific knowledge is also an extremely important issue, especially in dealing with the energy objectives, and there must be no taboos in this regard. What is clear if we are to deal with CO2 gas emissions and the problem of global warming, is that we have a lot of hard decisions to make. The fact that a serious world discussion of the nuclear option is often pre-empted by remarks which attempt to suggest that hydrogen represents a reasonable alternative is an indication of our intellectual slovenliness. Hydrogen is 50, if not 60, years away, and there is currently a real energy gap affecting 2 billion people around the planet who have no access to electricity whatsoever. Looking at global energy markets in an open and dispassionate way to see how this could be provided in a manner which minimizes damage to the planet requires a degree of intellectual honesty, and higher education institutions, and particularly academics, must play a key role in this area.

It will also be very important to keep all the players looking in the same direction. We must not let the seriousness of this be hijacked. We are in what appears to be a potentially perilous situation because of the multiplication of uncertainty. Keeping actors focused in the same direction is therefore paramount. In this sense, dialogue with civil society is crucial, and it is also important that this dialogue not only be a process of listening to public concerns, it must also be question of educating public concerns about what the real options available, and of trying to keep, as it were, the discussions about globalization in a realistic perspective.

A sixth objective could have been listed by Kofi Annan among his priorities: education. This is certainly the OECD's sixth objective, and the reason why the OECD has upgraded the status of its work on education. There are practical things that must be kept in mind in an interdependent world. The critical role of life long learning is obviously important. The role of universities in creating knowledge is well established, and will be even more important in a world of uncertainty. But the role of universities in transmission of knowledge is absolutely critical.

The role of universities in economic development is extremely important as it represents one aspect of helping people to identify with place. Whereas Gilles Breton suggests that we are moving rapidly towards the disappearance of the spatial importance - or place - the opinion in the OECD would rather be that place and locality is today more important, not less so. The social inclusion role of universities in an uncertain world is therefore extremely important. Universities represent today a mass system: they do not represent the elite system which existed in the past. Universities play an extremely important civil role: that of mediators between the State and Civil Society.

Maintaining levels of global excellence is also extremely important. Governments see universities as being one of the motors of globalization. Be realistic: they will look for increasing economic returns from education, but it would be wrong to overstretch the expectations of higher education, in the same way as was done in the late fifties and early sixties, when so much damage was done to education because it was presented as the way to a new social utopia. The suggestion at the time was that

4Globalisation: What Issues are at Stake for Universities? Université Laval, Québec Canada 5education really was going to be the vehicle of the new utopia and a new society, and that all the social inequality problems which confronted our society at the time could be resolved through the expansion of higher education and at the cost of a few additional percentage points of GDP. The deception which followed was very costly. This question should be approached carefully. It is clear that education is the major residual factor in economic growth. It has a major role to play. It is one of the motors of globalization. But most fundamentally, the role of higher education is in equipping society, and the individuals within it, at all different levels, with the capacity to navigate through, and doubt intelligently, in an increasingly uncertain world. This problematique will in all probability worsen rather than improve. The complexity will multiply, that much seems clear. The new issues will emerge, but our capacity to understand and codify them will become more difficult to master. Therefore, it would appear that this role of transmission, both among university students and society in general, and in the context of life-long learning, this helping of people to cope with and navigate through doubt in the global economy, is extremely important.

< Back - Article List - Next >