GLOBAL CIVIL SOCIETY Explaining global civil society The advance of globalization, and the progressive ‘de-territorializati economic, cultural and political life, has gradually weakened the idea that society | should be understood merely in domestic or national terms. If societies are fash. ioned out of a usually stable set of relationships between and among their members, involving mutual awareness and at least a measure of cooperation, ithas sometimes been suggested that one of the consequences of globalization has been the emergence of ‘transnational’ or ‘world’ society (Burton 1973; Buzan 2004), However, the extent to which societal identities have been, or are in the process of being, established across the global population as a whole should not be oyer- stated. A perhaps fruitful way of thinking about the transnational dimension of society is in terms of what is called ‘global civil society’ (see p. 156). Interest in the idea_of global civil society gr i aic_of new organizations and movements started to appear, which both sought to challenge or resist what _was seen as ‘corporate’ globalizati is a models of social, economic and political development. This happened against a backdrop of the spread of demands for democratization around the world, in the aftermath of the Cold War, and in the light of the intensifying process of global interconnectedness. In some cases, these groups and organizations rejected glob- alization altogether, styling themselves as Part of an ‘anti-globalization’ move- ment, but in other cases they supported a reformed model of globalization, sometimes seen as ‘social democratic’ or ‘cosmopolitan’ globalization. The development of emergent global civil society can best be explained through the theory of countervailin, r, as developed (1963). In this view, emergent global civil society is a direct reaction to the peseeiyed domination of corporate interests within the globalization a ai oe 4 of neoliberalism (see p. 93). This helps to explain the ideological orientation most of these new groups and movements, which broadly favour a glob Justice or world ethics agenda, reflected in a desire to extend the efficacy of human rights, deepen international law (see p. 339) a citizen networks to monitor and put pressure on states andacai CONCEPT Global civil society The term ‘civil society’ refers to a realm of autonomous groups and associations that operate independently of government. Globat civil society thus highlights a realm in which transnational non- governmental groups and associations interact. These groups are typically voluntary and rnon-profitmaking, setting ‘them apart from TNCs. However, the term ‘global civil society’ is complex and contested. In its) ‘activist’ version, transnational social | movements are the key agents of global civil society, giving it an ‘outsider’ orientation and ‘strong focus on | humanitarian goals and ‘cosmopolitan ideals. In fe ply Vetson: NGOs | are the key agents of civil society, giving ‘an ‘insider’ orientation ‘and meaning that it overaps significantly bi governance (see p. 462). i (© New Left:A curent in leftist thought that rejected both orthodox communism and social democracy in favour of a politics of liberation based ‘on decentralization and participatory democracy. x izations (Kaldor 2003). The growth of such groups has also been facilitagy | the emergence of a framework of global governance, which Pas both prog civif society groups with sources of funding and given ee opportuni engage in policy formulation and, sometimes, polic implementation, factors include the wider availability of advanced ICT to facilitate ‘ransnatiog communication and organization; and the development of a pool of edu professionals in both developed and developing countries who, albeit in digg ent ways and for different reasons, feel alienated by the globalized capi x heh arth Summit’ held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 is often cited as the earl evidence of a functioning global civil society. The formation of the World §o¢, Forum in 2001 gave the global civil society sector a greater sense of focus organizational direction, enabling it to challenge its great capitalist rival, the World Economic Forum, In this sense, global civil society has emerged asa thin force between TNCs and international organizations, representing neither the market nor the state, However, the concept of global civil society remain controversial. A neologism of the 1990s, the idea of global civil society quickly became fashionable, being used by world leaders and policy-makers as well asby political activists. But is it a reality, or merely an aspiration? Participation in global civil society, for instance, is restricted to a relatively small number of people. None of its groups yet constitutes a genuine mass movement, compari- ble, say, to the trade union movement or the mass membership of poliial parties of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Moreover, there are doubts about the degree of interconnectedness within global civil society: isi one thing or a number of things? In particular, there are differences between the two main actors within global civil society: transnational social movementsand NGOs. Transnational social movements and NGOs ‘Transnational social movements, sometimes called ‘new’ social movements developed during the 1960s and 1970s against the backdrop of growing studet radicalism, anti-Vietnam war protest and the rise of ‘counter-cultural’ attitude and sensibilities. Key examples included the women’s movement, the envil0™ mental_or_green_movement and the peace movement. These movemellt attracted the young, the better-educated and the relatively affluent, and typically embraced_a ‘postmaterialist’ ethic (see p. 157). They tended to be mo" concerned with quality of life issues and cultural change than with so advancement in the traditional sense, Although they articulated the views different groups, they nevertheless subscribed to a common (if notalways et! defined) ideology, linked broadly to the ideas of the New Left. From the Oe these movements had a transnational, even global, orientation. This rele, fact that, in many cases, support for them spills naturally across example, the women’s movement) and also that, given the nal concerns, national divisions are seen as part of the problem rather of the solution (for instance, the peace movement and the green move Such tendencies were accentuated by the development, from ‘onwards, of a new wave of social movement activism, with the ¢! of what has variously been called the ‘anti-globalization)also part-funded by government ~ Médecins Sans Frontieres (known in English as ‘Doctors without Borders’), for example, receives almost half its funding from governmental sources. Indications of the growing links between NGOs and TNCs can be found, for instance, in the fact that the World Economic Forum now embraces representatives of leading NGOs, and that a ‘revolving door’ has developed through which TNCs demonstrate their commitment to corporate social responsibility by employing former NGO leaders and specialists. Globalization from below? Has global civil society contributed to a reconfiguration of global power? Does it represent an alternative to top-down corporate globalization, a kind of bottom-up democratic vision of a civilizing world order, of ‘globalization from below’? Optimists about global civil society argue that it has two main advan- tages. First, jt provides an Jance to corporate power. Until the 1990s, the advance of TNC interests met little effective resistance, meaning that international organizations in particular fell too easily under the sway of a neoliberal agenda committed to free markets and free trade. Transnational social movements and NGOs help to ensure that such interests and ideas are checked, challenged and scrutinized, not (necessarily) to block corporate interests or inhibit economic globalization, but to strengthen the global policy-making process by bringing more views and voices to the table. civil society is often seen as form of fledgling democratic global politics. This has occurred because civil society bodies have articulated the interests of people and groups who have been disempowered by the globalization process acting 28 2 kind of counter-hegemonic force. Similarly, by introducing an element of public i accountability to the workings of international bodies, conferences, functions as a channel of communica- institutions. ‘However, emergent global civil society also has its critics. In the first place, the democratic credentials of NGOs and, for that matter, social movements are entirely bogus. For example how can NGOs be in te foretont of demosriza: con perships, committed activists and the ability to mobilize popular protests and infl undoubtedly social movements and NGOs political Ee YB coca author, when there i 20 mechanism for the against those of