[asia-apec 59] Globalisation: its Impact and Challenges to Labor Migration, Part I

[AMC]

Embargoed for Publication
(Final version and permission for use can be requested from the Asian
Migrant Centre <amc at hk.super.net> by 2 September 1996.)


    GLOBALISATION: ITS IMPACT AND CHALLENGES TO LABOR MIGRATION     

by May-an Villalba
Unlad-Kabayan Migrant Services Foundation, Inc.
Quezon City, Philippines

Paper presented to the Consultation on "Migrant Workers Challenging Global
Structures" sponsored by the Asian Migrant Centre (AMC), Migrant Forum in
Asia (MFA) and the Joint Committee on Migrants in Korea (JCMK), 28 August to
1 September 1996, Seoul, Korea. This paper draws from earlier papers written
and presented at the Ecumenical Consultation on Uprooted People, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, November 1995 and the Roundtable on Effective Respect for
the Rights and Dignity of Migrants: 9-11 February 1996, Ferney, France. 


I. Globalisation from a historical perspective

Globalisation has become the catchword of today.  I would like to first
tackle this topic from a socio-historical perspective.

Gloabalisation from this perspective is a historical process in which world
views, systems of production, technology and trade and systems of
relationships between people are systematically propagated throughout the
world sometimes successfully, sometimes not. With this definition we may
venture that globalisation started in the ancient era. Probably the first
globalizer of the "known world" was Alexander son of Philip of Macedon who
went East and built the Greek empire. (Easton. 33)

Globalisation was called "Hellenization" then. It was a process where Greek
civilization, culture and power were propagated. 

The process was called "Christianization" under Spain, Portugal and the Holy
Roman Empire and became formalized as "Colonization" during the British
Empire. After the industrial revolution it became "Imperialism" under the
auspices of Britain, Germany, the United States and Japan. And now it is
"Globalisation" under TNCs, World Bank and the World Trade Organisation. The
players change but the process continues.

This early I would like to link globalisation to migration. The principal
means for globalisation in ancient times and to some extent today was
through population movements. The principal means of transporting economic,
political and ideological models across the globe was through the movement
of the global agents themselves and the forced migration of their workforce.

 Human history in some respect is therefore a history of population
movements as much as a process towards homogenization in ideas and meanings,
in economics and in power. Furthermore, globalisation is not a one-sided
movement from the center to the periphery. The periphery enriches the
center. Populations also migrate to the urban center to directly influence
it. In many ways, a center that adapts to the positive contributions of the
periphery is able to become the center for a longer period than it would
otherwise if it denied the contributions as well as the needs of the periphery.

Largescale migrations from Europe and Africa characterize the early history
of what is now called the United States and Canada. 

Large population movements called "invasions" occurred in Europe such as by
the Germanic tribes in the 13th century and by the Turks in the 15th century
(Easton, 80). There was the expansion of Russians to Central and East Asia
in the 17th-18th centuries.

Migration in the Middle East has been going on from the period of the
Babylonian, Egyptian and Persian empires. During the colonial period, modern
states were carved out basically from tribal groups in the region and
according to the convinience of the colonizing powers. Today the population
of the Gulf states are so ethnically mixed it seems impossible to define
citizenship of the states. (Papazian)

North Africa was settled and colonized by France in the 19th century and
subsequently by other European powers. Africa was subdivided again according
to colonial convinience in the 20th century. The arbitrary divisions
exacerbated tribal conflicts which to this day remain basically unresolved.

South America saw Latinization by Spain and Portugal.

The Indian subcontinent was settled by Indo-Arian invaders probably as early
as 4,000 B.C. (Latourette, 43) They introduced Brahmanism, converted the
aboriginal Dravidians and pushed the non-converts to the margins of society.

Indonesia fought for the independence of the territory claimed by the Dutch
and went on to annex East Timor and West Papua. The transmigration policy is
being carried out to diffuse the popula tion of Java and to populate
frontier states. A tacit objective of transmigration is also to propagate
Pancasila, the ideology of the state.

Malaysia incorporated Sarawak and Sabah in Borneo by virtue of English rule
there and despite very little historical ties and interaction between the
Peninsular states and the eastern states. (Latourette, 671)

Korea became a suzerainty of China as early as the Chou dynasty. Chinese
migrants to Korea increased during the Chin dynasty. Korea began to be
independent about the end of the Later Han (1st century B.C.) Japan
subjugated Korea in July 1894 as a first step in its advance towards China.
The Chinese were defeated by Japan and forced to sign the Treaty of
Shimonoseki which among others ceded Taiwan (Formosa) and Korea to Japan.
(Latourette, 428) Japan carried out a forced migration policy among its
Chinese, Taiwanese (Formosan) and Korean subjects in order to provide cheap
labor to burgeoning industries in Japan in the earlier part of this century.

The point being made is that the history of the world is a history where
people move and propagate their world views and their systems of production
compelling other peoples to take stock of their identities and their own
systems towards a process of acculturation, adaptation and resistance.

Globalisation therefore is a continuing process of interaction of
populations and cultures. As such it can not be a smooth process but rather
a conflict in which ideas and systems are constantly being introduced,
challenged, revised and perfected towards convergence.

2. Post modern globalisation     

In the post-modern era, globalisation involves most obviously the expansion
of the "market economy", a model of economic production and relations that
reflects the philosophy of the market which is seen as the ultimate
regulating mechanism. It involves liberalization of trade and investment
rules; privatisation of government corporations and of basic social services
and public utilities; deregulation of sectors of the economy so that the
market decides how much to produce and at what price as well as deregulation
of foreign exchange; accelerated industrialization, among others.

On the macro level it is the propagation of a set of relations between
nations mediated by a multilaterial agency like the World Trade
Organisation. Other agencies like the United Nations and the World Bank
which have become centers also play corresponding roles in homogenizing the
periphery.

Today, the world is said to be "globalising" in the sense that world trade
and investments are expanding to include all if not most of the countries in
the world. Up to the 1970's, the main instrument for economic integration
and globalisation was foreign investments carried out by transnational
corporations (TNCs) or multinational enterprises (MNEs). In recent years it
has come to be acknowledged that world trade has outstripped the growth of
world investments by 3% per annum since 1950 so that trade has replaced
investments as the main instrument for global integration. (p.5 #2, WE, ILO
1995) Of course, a major player in world trade are the TNCs themselves. 

By reckoning of the global agents, trade and investments are redefining the
world economy. They are redefining the structure of output which
consequently also change the structure of employ ment. (p5, #3 WE 1995) 
Qouting from World Bank and other sources, the ILO contends that significant
industrialization is being achieved in developing countries (#3,p5,WE). This
is measured in terms of phenomenal growth rates and through the rise of the
share of manufacturing to 20% of the output of developing countries
principally the NICs which percentage share is similar to that in the North.

Global output also indicates a shift towards services representing 65% of
total output. (#3,p5,WE) Industrialization in the developing countries seems
to be indicated also by the fact that of the total value of world trade, 71%
are manufactures rather than primary products -- agricultural, mining,
fishing and forest products.

	Measuring benefits and costs

Praises are being sung to TNCs for being harbingers of  Foreign Direct
Investments (FDIs), new technologies and new jobs. They are reported to
directly account for 73 million new jobs created, 12 million of these jobs
are in the South.

In some developing countries, TNCs account for 20% of non-agricultural
employment.

The International Labor Organisation (ILO) also argues that the benefits of
the Uruguay Round of GATT could mean a 20% increase in world trade and a 5%
increase in world output. A GATT provision that the binding of 99% of
tariffs in the North and 59% of tariffs in the South could only lead to more
trade and growth, they say. (#8 WE p 5)

The ILO however recognizes that there is massive differences in the position
and performance of different countries in regard to trade and investment.
The NICs in East and Southeast Asia have outstripped countries in Latin
America and Africa where stagnation seems to be the rule. (#4, WE p5)

Hidden behind the gloss performance reports is a slightly disturbing detail
that 76% of total stock of FDIs to the South is concentrated in 10 countries
only. This indicates that there is severe competition of countries for FDI
and therefore access to trade as well.

Furthermore, while the investment and trade performances of some South
countries benefited by trade may be called phenomenal, the actual benefits
do not necessarily accrue to the whole population. The existence of wealth
gaps among the social groups in these countries raise serious adjustment and
distributional issues according to ILO. (#4,WE)

The social costs of major economic reforms necessary for countries to be
internationaly competitive in the light of distorted economic structures
furthermore raises serious questions about the process of globalisation
itself. (#6,WE) 	Exclusion and disintegration

We cannot overlook the fact that when we speak of globalisation we are also
thinking about whole regions that are shut out of this process simply
because they are not players in trade and investments. Furthermore, even if
most NICs are posting record growth rates we must ask many questions such
as: who are the prime beneficiaries: Whose rights are being sacrificed? What
role do low paid workers and migrant workers play in the productivity and
competitiveness of the NICs? How much do women pay for development? How are
traditional values and social solidarity affected? What costs are incurred
in the environment for such high growth rates?

After the initial optimism in the 1990s about the apparent invincibility of
globalisation and its sterling effects in Asia, there is now more sober
realism about its real significance. In the North industrial countries, a
critical attitude is growing largely focused around the twin issues of
disinvestment and migration of jobs to the South. There is growing concern
that job prospects for unskilled workers in the North is getting seriously
low. Unemployment is being blamed on growing populations of labor migrants.
The cry is against "unfair competition" for jobs posed by migrants and
developing countries. The loss of demand for local labor is also perceived
to cause the decline of wages. (#6,WE) Moreover, the migration of factories
southward is causing Northern countries to upgrade technologies toward
automation which further reduces job openings. 

Protectionism towards local capital and jobs is growing in the North. ILO
argues that this protectionism only delays free trade and investment flows.
(#6,WE) The ILO suggests that the North must pay more attention to
employment performance instead of looking for scapegoats.

Globalization is also criticized in the South. The most severe criticism
comes from the most marginallized states. If African countries see the
collapse of employment in the modern sector and if trade and investment have
actually declined in their contexts, then what is happening is not
globalisation but disintegration of the globe. Structural adjustment
programs have virtually wiped out decades of social security investments
such as farm and labor subsidies, thus causing massive unemployment and
poverty. In Latin America there has been a deterioration of employment with
only marginal improvements being reported in recent years. The relocation of
investments and trade across countries merely on the basis of profitability
overlooks the moral dimension, that jobs and lives are being sacrificed in
the most needy countries at the altar of globalisation.

Criticism is also increasingly coming from the so-called Transition
Economies. After the initial euphoria of the collapse of communism there is
sober realization that the Transition Economies are not all that exciting as
investment venues. Consequently its share in world trade has declined.
Massive unemployment is growing. The World Bank has pronounced that the
outlook for Russia is bleak. (#33 WE) Here again there is no globalisation
only disintegration.

In developing countries, the operations of TNCs have not been all salutary.
Unrestricted operations allow TNCs to be "footloose" moving from country to
country where advantages are seen to be greatest.

The means for competitiveness in FDI in the south involves the enforcement
of economic and political stability which is nothing less than the muzzling
of the rights of workers to form trade unions and for unions to strike on
issues of wages and working conditions. It also means that developing
country governments must spend more public money away from social services
in favor of better infrastructure for FDI and trade. All possible benefits
are given to TNCs to allow them effective management of their enterprises.
States are encouraged to provide transparent policies towards investors
whereas native enterprises are often deprived of access to their own
capital. (#22 WE)

The World Bank and WTO recognize that economic reforms are going to cost
states a great deal of social displacements. For this reason they advise
developing countries to establish safety nets to "catch" the "fall outs".
(#23 WE) For example liberalization of trade in agriculture which is being
called for in globalisation is openly being acknowledged to lead to the
displacement of rice farmers, livestock breeders and native industries. The
government must catch them with "safety nets".

In view of these, the ILO calls governments to prioritize the solutions for
underemployment and poverty alleviation. (#25 WE) It is calling for
governments to support the small farm sector. (#28 WE) In other words while
globalisation goes on unhampered, the state must solve its own problems.


Asian Migrant Centre (AMC)
4 Jordan Road
Kowloon, Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2312 0031 Fax: (852) 2992 0111
Email: amc at hk.super.net