Global civil society

Global civil society is often described as a response to the dominance and the too often detrimental impact of economic globalization to people’s lives. However, in the

86

Friedman, p. 9.

87

Falk, “The making of…”, p.39.

88

Richard Falk, “Global civil society: Perspectives, initiatives, movements”, Oxford Development Studies, vol.26, no. 1 (February 1998), p. 100.

89

117

same way that globalization itself has diverse meanings, the idea of a global civil society is equally diverse and complex. The following section examines the different descriptions of global civil society, with a particular focus on the environment and learning.

Falk earlier identified the environment and human rights movements as examples of transnational social forces that have managed to establish links between local action and global campaigns as examples of globalization-from-below. He later established his preference to refer to these forces as “global civil society” rather than “transnational civil society”, because he argued that transnational situates and limits the action involved to crossing national boundaries. On the other hand,

… global civil society refers to the field of action and thought occupied by individual and collective citizen initiatives of a voluntary, non-profit character both within states and transnationally.90

Similarly, Goran Hyden identified the global environment and human rights movements, such as Greenpeace and Amnesty International, as examples of a global civil society. He defined civil society as,

… the arena of social engagement which exists above the individual yet below the state, encompassing a complex network of economic, social, and cultural practices based on friendship, family, the market and voluntary affiliation.91

He argued that the growth of these global associations and networks indicate that they no longer exist merely between the individual and the state but have crossed national borders in both scope and influence.

90

Falk, “Global civil society…”, p. 100.

91

Goran Hyden, “Building civil society at the turn of the millennium” in John Burbidge (ed), Beyond prince and merchant: Citizen participation and the rise of civil society (New York: Pact Publications, 1997), pp. 33.

118

Budd Hall92 identified the actors who occupy the space he referred to as global civil society, which is for him

… the place where social movement organizations, international research and advocacy networks, global policy bodies as well as a wide variety of non- governmental (NGO) and international non-governmental organizations interact with states, United Nations and other intergovernmental bodies and the private sector itself.93

He identified two inter-related phenomena with regards to an emerging global civil society. “First, it is the sum-total of local, national or regional civil society structures, [and second,] is the proliferation of specifically global forms of civil society.”94

Karen Mundy and Lynn Murphy95 identify that these same groups, identified as the building blocks of global civil society, have been called either “transnational advocacy networks” or “transnational social movements”. Their activism targets global institutions and issues and use global visibility to advocate for changes at the national level. Some writers refer to these very same groups or actors, such as the environment, women’s and peace movements as examples of “new social movements”. One reason for the distinction is that unlike the (old) social movements, such as organized labor, which struggled for national democracy,

… these new social movements are playing a crucial role in global democratization [through] mobilizing transnational communities of resistance and solidarity against impending global ecological, economic and security crises.96

92

Budd Hall, “Global civil society: Theorizing a changing world”, Convergence, vol.33, no.1/2 (2000), pp. 10-31. 93 Hall, p.11. 94 Hall, p.12. 95

Karen Mundy and Lynn Murphy, “Transnational advocacy, global civil society? Emerging evidence in the field of education”, Comparative Education Review, vol. 45, no. 1 (2001), pp. 85-126.

96

119

In the Philippines, Robin Broad and John Cavanagh97 observe that in addition to local and national work, organizations have become active in the international level developing partnerships with environment, development and religious groups overseas.

Part of the motivation for expanding international links has been Filipinos’ growing realization that transnational connections are the only way to fight international impediments to sustainable development.98

The previous descriptions of global civil society have focused on three areas. First, is its rationale, that of responding to the forces of economic globalization. Second, is its structure, which is often composed of multi-tiered and diverse networks around the world. And third, is its composition, which is an array of different individual and groups that work on a wide range of issues at different levels.

Aside from the motivation to respond to economic globalization, Held and others argue that the growth of the technology for communication has greatly facilitated the formation of this global civil society. In fact, environmental NGOs have been identified by Howard Frederick to be one of the first transnational payers that have exploited the rapid changes in global telecommunications.99 The advancement of communication technology has contributed to the increase in the potential for public participation and the generation and use of new knowledge at the grassroots level. Grassroots activists have used this very technology to make others more aware and coordinate these local struggles.

97

Robin Broad and John Cavanagh, Plundering Paradise: The Struggle for the environment in the Philippines (Berkley: University of California Press, 1993).

98

Broad and Cavanagh, p. 152.

99

Howard Frederick, Global Communication and International Relations (Belmont: Wadsworth, 1993)

120

Naomi Klein quotes a Financial Times’ description of the tools that contributed to the victory of this grassroots movement against the Multi-lateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) in April 1988.

The opponents’ decisive weapon is the Internet. Operating from around the world via Web sites, they have condemned the proposed agreement as a secret conspiracy to ensure global domination by multinational companies, and mobilized an international movement of grassroots resistance.”100

And there continues to be more examples, of protests against economic globalization such as the farmers who challenged McDonald's in France, the massive protests during the WTO meetings in Seattle, and the M1 global protest rallies. According to Amartya Sen,

The protesters often describe themselves as anti-globalisation. Are they really? The so-called anti-globalisation protesters can hardly be, in general, anti-globalisation since these protests are among the most globalised events in the contemporary world.101

However, despite the growing use of the technology to advance the cause of global civil society, it is important to acknowledge that access to these technologies is highly concentrated in the developed world. Furthermore, the languages that dominate the Internet and the ones used in global civil society networks is either English, and at times French. Both these circumstances effectively “excludes many important voices”.102

100

Guy de Jobquieres, “Network guerrillas,” Financial Times 30 April 1998 cited by Naomi Klein,

No Logo (London: Flamingo, 2000), p. 443.

101

Amartya Sen, “All players on a global stage” The Australian 16 May 2001, p. 11 [edited version of Alfred Deakin Lecture in Melbourne].

102

Kumi Naidoo “ The new civic globalism”, Nation, vol. 270, no.18 (5 August 2000), pp. 34+. (Academic Search Elite: Item no. 3061787

121

Within the context of environmental problems and action, Ronnie Lipschutz103 outlined his reasons for using the term global civil society.

First, the term provides a convenient sort of shorthand. Second, it underlines the grounding of this sector in societal processes as opposed to state-centered, institutionalized political ones. And third, it sugge sts a form of social action somewhat parallel to the holism that one finds in some ecological models, without suggesting the indivisibility of the planet so characteristic of much environmental analysis.104

Helmut Breitmeier and Volker Rittberger105 identify two developments, related to the global nature of environmental problems, that have contributed to the emergence of a global civil society, namely; the need for international collective management and for an international policy-making system. Aside from describing global civil society as a “set of actors who are able to act spontaneously and organize themselves freely without states imposing their wills on them”, he identified that for such to exist “presupposes that the same states respect fundamental human rights, especially political and civil rights.”106

However, Lipschutz acknowledges that global civil society is by no means a unity; in fact, Hall identified examples of contradictions within and between NGOs that see themselves as part of this emerging global civil society. One such contradiction involves NGOs, who continue to seek new funding sources, becoming subcontractors for global institutions, such as the World Bank. The same is true for NGOs that act as subcontractors for national governments in poverty alleviation programs in the Philippines. This arrangement, in effect, limits their ability to be critical of these institutions that provide these contracts.

103

Ronnie Lipschutz, Global civil society and global environmental governance; the politics of nature from place to planet (New York: State University of New York, 1996).

104

Lipschutz, p. 1-2.

105

Helmut Breitmeier and Volker Rittberger, “Environmental NGOs in an emerging global civil society” in P. Chasek (ed), The global environment in the twenty-first century: prospects for international cooperation (Tokyo: United Nations University, 2000), pp.130-163.

106

122

It is therefore important to identify that amidst these contradictions there are segments of global civil society that continue to be “oriented in ways that specifically promote social and political change.”107 This is one reason why CEC prefers to be identified as part of the progressive people’s movement in the Philippines rather than with civil society. Chapter 5 further describes the progressive people’s movement in the Philippines and identifies similar contradictions brought about by these globalizing forces it is fighting against.

Lipschutz identified four modes of action that global civil society has been engaged with in the area of environmental protection. These include:

… ecosystems management and restoration; fostering of localized environmental/development projects, environmental education; and participation in national and transnational networks and alliances.108

CEC has been involved, in varying degrees in the conduct of all four modes of action identified by Lipschutz. Each of these is discussed in chapters 5 and 6, with a more in-depth discussion on environmental education in the succeeding chapters.