Globalisation and Economic and Social Rights of Women
*
By Mirjana Dokmanovic Women’s Centre for Democracy and Human Rights, Serbia |
On Globalisation... In parallel with integration processes the blurring of firm borders among nations, the building of Western-type democracy and capitalist relations based on market liberalisation and unhampered movement of capital, goods, investment, and labour is extended. Late in the twentieth century, the world experienced some great changes, which, among all, opened the space for promotion of human rights and building international relations and international policy. In the globalising world, human rights are becoming more and more significant, in international and internal policy and in international law, thus developing a new branch of law – the international human rights law. The humanities contain various globalisation concepts depending on discipline. In economics, globalisation refers to economic internationalisation and extension of capitalist market relations. In international relations, the focus refers to the development of global policy and increased intensity of relations among nations. In sociology, attention is paid to the increase of social relations throughout the world and the occurrence of a “global society”. In cultural studies, central research refers to global communications, post-colonial cultures. The cultural diversity of approaches indicates that globalisation is a multi-dimensional process that may not be categorised as a one-dimensional reality or interpreted unilaterally. It is certain that globalisation is a complex social, economic, cultural, technological, and political process in which the mobility of capital, ideas, technology, organisations, and people has acquired a growing global and transnational form. In this paper, globalisation means the processes intensifying for the past two decades, including the movement of short-term foreign investment based on speculative exchange rates, long-term direct foreign investment, trade at the world level with the policy of diminishing obstacles that would hamper the growing share of transnational corporations in world production and trade, interdependence of world production, people’s movement motivated by trade or job search, and the development of new forms of communication. These processes have also resulted in the development of global civil society and its new participants, such as international non-governmental organisations dealing with human rights promotion and observation, which gain a higher role within this sphere, from the international level and at the UN system level to the national and the local levels. This impacts the extension of human rights observation of culture, their integration into local legislation, and the development of international, regional, and national mechanisms for human rights observation. In the last decade, there has been growing influence from another group of actors on the global scene, which have shaped global processes, to a significant extent. Those are multinational corporations dominating world production; the World Trade Organisation, as the first multilateral organisation that has power to subordinate the will of national governments to its rules; the Permanent International Criminal Court; regional blocks such as European Union, ASEAN, NAFTA; and groups for political coordination at the global level (G7, G8, G10, G22, G77, OECD). These actors create new rules in international relations, economics, trade, and international law. Awareness of human rights is rising – the number of conventions and documents regulating human rights and the number of their signatories are rising. Awareness is rising regarding the common destiny of all nations and their relationship with the planet’s destiny, resulting in the increase in the number of international agreements on environmental protection at the global level (the ozone layer preservation, sea and ocean preservation, desertification, climate changes, etc.). Also, some new multilateral agreements have been made on trade, intellectual property, communications, etc. At the international level, new global (UN Millennium Goals) goals for regional development have received agreement. A new stage of globalisation based on new financial markets and growing global service markets is being created by strong development of new types of communication and the development of faster and cheaper transportation (rail, road, and air traffic). The removal of barriers to economics, trade, and transportation has resulted in by-products of this development – global relationships of socially undesirable and harmful activities, such as international crime, international terrorism, trafficking of women, trade in weapons and drugs. This has increased the significance of international acts of compliance among nations, the number of international agreements and conventions in this field, and the development of international law and human rights. Economic Globalisation and Poverty Increase Economic globalisation, the globalisation of finance, trade, investment, and technology since the 1980s, has resulted in a technological boost and faster flow of capital than was the case in all previous periods. It has also resulted in unimagined economic and technological opportunities for individuals. At the same time, it has resulted in a decrease in the number of those who may enjoy the benefits of economic globalisation. Economic liberalisation results in a series of adverse consequences [1] such as:
Globalisation improves the life of many, but it provides more power to those who have already been powerful; it results in the marginalisation of whole areas of the world and social groups (women, the disabled, the elderly, migrants, etc.) [2] The neoliberal type of globalisation deepens inequalities, poverty, and conflicts, and thus hampers sustainable development and the achievement of economic and social rights for the vast majority of people. Most people are deprived of the opportunity to take part in decision making and to control their own environment and resources, thereby jeopardising basic principles and human rights as follows:
From trade liberalisation through growing power of multilateral corporations to progress in information and communications technology, all modern globalisation processes affect the enjoyment of human rights. According to UNDP data [3] , the ratio of income between the top 20% of the population ranked according to their income and the bottom 20% has rapidly grown: in 1997, this ratio amounted to 74:1, and in 1990 it was as high as 60:1, which was double the 1960 ratio. Consolidation and merge among the largest firms result in the creation of mega-corporations, hampering the competitiveness in the world market. In 1999, the ten largest companies in the field of telecommunications control 86% of world market with the value of USD 262 billion, and the ten largest companies in the field of pesticide production control 85% of the market with the value of over USD 30 billion. On the other hand, around 80 countries have lower income per capita than was the case a decade ago, including the countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Around 1.2 billion people live in extreme poverty, with an income of less than one dollar per day. Around 1.5 billion people do not have access to basic health care and drinking water; a billion people are illiterate; and 180 million children are underfed. All these data and warnings of the UNDP [4] indicate that these figures will grow in the future, instead of decreasing, despite the fact that the majority of UN member states ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. [5] An additional phenomenon of economic globalisation and poverty expansion is the increase of the insecurity of individuals, groups, and nations in various domains – economic, financial, culture, employment, legal, social, health care, ecological, political, and personal. Under such conditions, the number of people who may not satisfy their basic livelihood, and thus realise their basic human rights, is increasing. The Effects of Poverty Growth The main promoters of neoliberalism are the main winners of the ruling concept of economic globalisation: international financial institutions, mega-corporations, transnational companies, and multinational corporations. Growing poverty in the world and the deepening gap between the rich and the poor is the direct effect of neoliberal macro-economic policy. The main characteristics of this concept include: 1. Market rule – the free movement of capital, goods, and services; the release of private enterprises from governmental restraints and control, regardless of the possibility of disadvantages for society; more openness to international trade and investment; the decrease of employees’ salaries and the elimination of their rights; the weakening of trade unions; and the lack of price controls. The phrase used for convincing of the masses says: “A deregulated market is the best way to achieve economic growth which will ultimately benefit everyone.” 2. The shortage of public expenditures for social services (including health care and education); the decrease of the network of institutions for the care of the poor; lower state’s expenditures for the maintenance of roads, bridges, water system etc. 3. Deregulation – the increase of national regulations in any field that may contribute to the decrease of profit, including employment safety, environmental protection, and job security. 4. Privatisation – the sale of public enterprises, goods, and services to private investors, including banks, key industrial branches, railways, motorways, power distribution, hospitals, higher education and tertiary education institutions, and water systems. 5. The minimisation of the concept of “public goods” or “communal ownership” existing during the socialist period in the transition countries, and its replacement with the concept of “individual responsibility”. The poor are pressured to find solutions on their own regarding education, health care, and social security; unless they manage this, they are accused of “not managing” and “not wanting to work”, etc. These are basics and concepts of the programme of “economic structural adjustment” imposed on developing countries as the only solution to solve economic crisis and to increase production. Neoliberalism is imposed by powerful international financial institutions such as International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank. Gender Dimensions of Poverty Nowadays, around 1.2 billion people in the world live in unacceptable conditions and poverty, and 70% of them are women [6] . In the 1990s, their percentage increased, especially in developing countries. Poverty feminisation has become a significant problem in countries in transition, as a short-term effect of political, economic, and social transformation. Women, especially elderly ones, are more and more exposed to the risk of poverty. Besides the fact that poverty affects the family as a whole it affects women more, due to work distribution and responsibility. Poverty especially exists with women living in rural areas. It is directly related to the lack of economic opportunities and independence, the difficult approach to education, and minimum participation in decision making. Poverty is effected by the insecurity of employment; restricted access of women to government, higher paid jobs, education, qualifications, production resources, new technology, financial credit; and strictly socially regulated roles. Gender Dimensions of International Trade Studies point out various effects of trade liberalisation that reflect on women depending on many factors and previous social conditions, for example, within the economic sphere, the division of labour by gender. Positive effects of trade liberalisation in developed countries open up new opportunities for employment especially for young and highly educated women in the jobs that were previously inaccessible to them. Another positive fact in developing countries is that trade expansion has facilitated and accelerated the absorption of the women’s labour force into modern industrial branches, and stable income sources, although lower in relation to men’s income, has provided women more economic independence. An increased share of women is especially visible in export-oriented branches such as: textiles, footwear, leather, and electronics, especially in free trade zones and in services. Gender-based labour segregation is visible in new jobs in the export sector, often to a higher degree than in traditional employment, and work in the informal sector also has increased. On the other hand, women’s unemployment remains higher than men’s unemployment, for there is a higher inflow of women searching for jobs in the labour market. This results in the decrease of salary levels and increases in the gaps between men’s and women’s average pay rates, thus discouraged employers to improve working conditions in primarily “women’s” sectors. The process of economic globalisation, characterising the weakening of the state and the lack of control under capital flow, mainly affects the most vulnerable social groups. The critics of this process often raise the question of the resulting types and quality of jobs. For women, those are jobs are often temporary, part-time, seasonal, employment at will, and/or contracted at the minimum salary, without any trade union protection. The privatisation process and trade liberalisation result in adverse effects, mostly regarding women, children, and households [7] . For example, water resource privatisation results in the fact that women in poor households cannot pay a charge for using it, leading to either lower consumption in the household or to the use of unsanitary water [8] . This is the result of the recent privatisation by IMF of the water system in Cochabamba, Bolivia [9] . Under the auspices of IMF and World Bank, the social service privatisation processes have been implemented in many indebted countries. This has had a drastic effect on women’s positions. Within the privatisation process, women have been the first to be dismissed, and salaries, benefits, and job security have been seriously reduced within the health care and educational sectors. [10] Effects of Economic Globalisation on Women Globalisation’s effects on women are both positive and negative. it is positive that economic globalisation enables additional and various opportunities for them. On the other hand, due to gender discriminatory forces within the labour market and women’s care responsibilities, women tend to earn lower wages and work fewer years than men. [11] The models of women’s direction into lower paid professions and jobs, historically evident in local and national economies, are reproduced in global economic sectors, too. Employers within global, export-oriented sectors employ women, and thus provide women opportunities to acquire new skills and knowledge, which would have been unavailable until that time within those industrial branches. Thus, women improve their position in the labour market in relation to their traditional economic and social roles in society. Another aspect of globalisation, which also has positive and negative effects on women, is the extension of new values into local cultures and customs. This is partly the result of local economic efforts to adjust to global economic trends and partly of people’s exposure to other cultures. The export of American (Spanish, French, etc.) TV and film literally provides a world stage for American (Spanish, French, etc.) culture. Cultural globalisation also means the extension and acceptance of individual foreign cultural norms, accepted by local cultures. These norms also include social relations between genders. Roles such as the woman in the family as mother and housewife, obedience to men, and men’s direction toward particular professions and skills, are stereotypes that decrease women’s competitiveness in the labour market and provide a new basis for discrimination against women. To the extent that cultural globalisation manages to weaken these cultural norms, it will provide better opportunities to women and improve their positions in the labour market in relation to men’s. However, the prevailing dichotomy between private and public in a society still pushes woman out of political and public spheres towards the family domain and the private sphere. The sustainability and intensification of this trend also is magnified by the division between economically productive and unproductive work (care economy), where the latter one, predominantly “women’s”, has no economic value from the classic economics point of view, thus disabling women to achieve their economic independence and political being equally. The underestimation of women’s contributions to their economies hampers their social promotion within many fields and spheres of life and work. New spaces are opened through the weakening of national states and through the creation of the possibilities of undermining the gender hierarchy and the creation of new bases for gender relations. Dispersion of states’ power is also magnified by non-democratic power centres and globalisation promoters "from above” [12] – corporations, capital, and market. “Globalisation-from-above” weakens the political power and autonomy of a state, decision making power, and independent policy creation, especially within the spheres of economics and gender equality. A state may not be willing to provide for employee rights if this will discourage investments and jeopardise its competitiveness in the global labour market. The effects are social exclusion, unemployment, low wages, and weakening of trade unions, and all this has a gender dimension. Economic systems based on profit often gain it at the expense of women’s work. Women are treated as a passive, suitable, and temporary labour force, which will accept low wages without demanding their human and labour rights. In the traditional division of labour by gender, women are automatically deemed to be more suitable for work within the textile industry and welfare services. This division is additionally stimulated through new forms and locations of work (service industries, tourism, employment within export free zones). A constant value within all this is the low economic value of women’s work. Economic globalisation has also encouraged transnational crime based on gender discrimination and exploitation (women’s trafficking, prostitution, sex tourism). Globalisation has effects on human rights achievement in general, as well as on women’s rights in particular, in terms of eroding civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights in the name of development, economic growth, and macroeconomic restructuring. Feminisation of Labour Force In the early 1980s, it became clear that the industrialisation of the “Third World” was predominantly based on women’s labour. Many studies emphasise the role of relatively cheap women’s labour in this process [13] . In South East Asian economies, significant contribution to production growth has been provided by young women employees willing to work hard for a lower salary than a man would accept, even under the conditions that trade unions do not allow. The result of this has been high inflow of women’s labour into unskilled and semi-skilled jobs. In Latin America, this inflow was especially high during the period of decreasing average wages. In the whole world, among the total number of industrial workers, women are 30-40%, while, on the other hand, within export-oriented branches, especially in the production of textiles, electronic components, and leather products, this percentage is often much higher, in particular cases, even as high as 90%. One study has concluded that a major part of the production by developing countries that is aimed at exporting has been made by women, thus the industrialisation of economies after World War II was guided both by export and feminisation. [14] The process of labour force feminisation in the developing countries was continued in the 1980s, not only in manufacturing, but also within service sectors, where the percentage of women’s employment increased to 30-50% [15] , in the same decade that was marked by falling wages and salaries. Women’s shares also increased within the jobs that require higher qualification and professionalism, such as legal services, banking, accounting, architecture, tourism, and auxiliary services, information services, etc. Worldwide exchange of services also has stimulated women’s labour force migration. At the same time, through the increase of women’s share in the labour market, their share in the informal sector also has increased, including their work within unregistered jobs, micro firms, housework, and self-employment. In urban areas of developing countries, many formal jobs have become “informal”, since employers aimed at increasing “flexibility” and decreasing production and labour costs by concluding subcontracts with workers. The growth of the informal sector also has been noticeable in developed countries. Women’s work at home is emphasised, starting from gender stereotypes of woman’s dedication to their family roles, as well as their less valuable work. Many women have accepted such jobs, with insecurity, low salary, and the lack of benefits, as a conventional form of gaining additional income, which, at the same time, enables them to take care of their households and children. Analyses show that employers, while requiring higher efficiency, do not only use cheap labour, which is both men and women’s, but also the possibility of contracting informal work, where women are used more. One of the reasons for women’s higher share in the labour market is the substitution of women’s for men’s labour, due to lower wages and less paid women’s work. Increasing globalisation and international competition have made salaries and labour costs a significant factor in determining the geographic location for investment and production, including the decision making on certain groups’ employment. Another aspect of labour market flexibilisation is the public sector decrease, mostly as a part of structural adjustment programmes and privatisation initiatives. In many countries, the public sector was main source of employment growth in the 1960s. These changes in the labour market also point out the necessity of welfare system reform. It is necessary to find alternative forms of protection and the improvement of the position of the most vulnerable groups in the labour market and to add flexibility through economic security improvement. Position of Women in the Transition Countries The adverse effects of economic transition in the post-socialist countries have affected mainly women, as the largest marginal social group. Case studies and the first ten-years of experience of transition countries indicate that, in terms of achieving economic and social rights, and within the social sphere, women in all post-socialist countries share the same consequences of transit from socialist to market economies [16] . 1. The aggravation of women’s positions in the labour market:
2. The increase of unemployment; 3. The increase of women’s share within flexible types of work (contracted, part-time, temporary, and seasonal jobs), in the simplest jobs, in unregistered work, and in the grey economy; 4. The decrease (from 1.5% to 15%) of women’s share in politics and in decision making, head, and managerial positions; 5. The lower access to capital, resources, credit possibilities, new knowledge, and professional training (prerequisites for better paid positions and entrepreneurial development); 6. The decrease of states’ social roles – increased engagement of women working at home and in family and child care; 7. The growth of women’s poverty, especially among those belonging to “invisible” social groups (urban, older, Roma, disabled, as well as single mothers, housewives, etc.); 8. The intensification of family violence, where women are victims most frequently; 9. The increase in discrimination against women within all types of public and working life; The socio-economic positions of women and the trends shaping them are the best reflection of the position of families in society, including rights and freedoms enjoyed by an individual. Mechanisms and Actions for Achieving Women’s Economic and Social Rights The economic and social rights of women are guaranteed by the following international legal documents, ratified by the majority of UN member states:
Women’s International Coalition for Economic Justice (WICEJ) adopted in 1995 the Declaration on Economic Justice, through which it criticised the holders of neoliberal policy where the welfare of economic growth is achieved to the detriment of human rights and welfare. Starting from the statement that words are not enough any more, the signatories of the Declaration stress that the achievement of Platform objectives is impossible within current microeconomic environment, and that it needs to be changed, requiring the achievement of rights and participation in management and economies. Rights and participation in management mean: 1. Linkage of economic, social, cultural, civil, and political rights; 2. Democratisation, transparency, and responsibility in decision making processes at all levels and in all institutions, including not only national states and local communities, but also corporations, non-governmental organisations, international financial institutions, religious organisations, and other international organisations; 3. The inclusion of the diversity of women’s perspectives in the processes of policy formulation and decision making at all levels; 4. The obedience to international instruments by all governments and multilateral institutions. Taking into account the power of international financial institutions in relation to individual nations, the UN system must take special measures to make those institutions responsible for the obedience of international agreements and the principles of justice and equality; 5. The affirmation of each nation’s responsibility to the population within its borders and the implementation of international mechanisms to establish the responsibility of transnational corporations and international financial and economic institutions; 6. The consistency of macroeconomic policies with social development and distributive justice. This means that macroeconomic policies are created in such a way to protect the rights of women, the poor, and healthy environment, instead of only expanding economic growth, trade, and corporate profit; 7. Reformation of the public sector, not through privatisation but through its effectiveness, justice, and adjustment to people’s needs; 8. Redefinition of the criteria of cost-effectiveness to take into account environmental degradation, social resources, and human resources (such as increased violence and health hazards); 9. Market regulation in the public interest to decrease inequality, prevent instability, increase employment, improve work place security, and determine a socially acceptable minimum wage at the national level; 10. The creation of new financial resources through new forms of taxation to stimulate sustainable social and economic development, such as toxic product production, international financial speculative profit, and international financial transactions; 11. The application of debt release rather than debt rescheduling, the creation of alternatives with focus on removing the effects of the imbalance of trade and new resources directed toward the South. Conclusions: Current economic globalisation based on neoliberalism stimulates and provides for the increase of the gap between the rich and the poor. The call for free markets and free movement of capital, investment, and goods has created “market fundamentalism” jeopardising the sovereignty of national states and has created an appropriate environment for conflicts. The advantages and benefits of economic globalisation are unequally distributed, and a disproportionately high portion of the costs are born by the poor, marginalised, and victims of discrimination according to ethnicity in the North and South. The current model of economic globalisation deepens historical and present inequalities on racial, ethnic, gender, and economic bases within and among nations, aggravating the possibility of establishing sustainable and equal development for all. Multilateral institutions, including World Bank, IMF, and WTO, promote globalisation of the type dominated by trade liberalism and privatisation. Such a model of globalisation and economic growth stimulation has aggravated economic, social, and culture conditions in which the most affected groups live; and it has contributed to the growth of poverty and social exclusion. Poverty has a gender dimension, for women are more exposed to the risk of poverty. The gender dimension also refers to unemployment, international trade, foreign debt issues, international resources, global management, and the programmes of economic structural adjustment. All these phenomena produce various effects on men and women. The analysis of women’s economic and social positions is the best indicator of the essence of neoliberal macroeconomic policy, which focuses on the goal of achieving profit. The women’s economic agenda (calling for improvement of women’s positions and the achievement of gender, economic, and social justice) may be the universal agenda for considering social development, redefining development objectives, and searching for alternatives: to redirect economic globalisation to the benefit of people rather than corporations; to result in improvement and welfare for the majority of the population rather than for individuals; and to focus economic policies to protection and enjoyment of human rights of all. References: 1. Falk, R. 2002, ‘Interpreting the Interaction of Global Markets and Human Rights’ in Globalization and Human Rights. A. Brysk, ed. University of California Press: Berkley 2. Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights, Preliminary report of the Secretary-General, General Assembly 55th Session, (A/55/342), 31 August 2000. 3. Joekes, S. P. (Ed.) 1987, Women in the World Economcy: an INSTRAW Study, Oxford University Press: New York 4. Joekes, S.P, 1995. ‘Trade-related Employment for Women in Industry and Services in Developing Countries’, in United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women Occasional Paper No. 5, UNRISD: Geneva. 5. Razavi, Sh. 2001, ‘Globalization, Employment and Women’s Empowerment’, Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW), Expert Group Meeting, 26-29 November 2001, New Delhi, India 6. Ruminska-Zimny, E. 2002, ‘Gender, Privatisation and Structural Adjustment in the Transition Countries: Trends and Issues in the UNECE Region’ in Transition, Privatisation and Women, ed. M. Dokmanovic, Women’s Centre for Democracy and Human Rights: Subotica 7. The Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Final report submitted by Mr. Danilo Türk, Special Rapporteur, (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16) 3 July 1992 8. The Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of human rights, Preliminary report submitted by J. Oloka-Onyango and Deepika Udagama, (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/13) 15 June 2000 9. UNECE, 1999, Economic Survey for Europe 1999, UNECE: Geneva 10. UNPP. 1999. Human Development Report 1999, Oxford University Press: New York 11. Watson, C. 2003, ‘Sell the rain – How the privatization of water caused riots in Cochahamba, Bolivia’, CBS News (Online), Available at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/water/bolivia.html
* Lecture presented to the participants of the Women’s Studies School in February, 2003, organized by the women’s NGO “Anima”, Kotor, Montenegro. [1] See: Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of all human rights, Preliminary report of the Secretary-General, General Assembly 55th Session, (A/55/342), 31 August 2000. [2] See: The Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Globalization and its impact on the full enjoyment of human rights, Preliminary report submitted by J. Oloka-Onyango and Deepika Udagama, (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/13) 15 June 2000 [3] Source: UNPP. 1999. Human Development Report, Oxford University Press: New York, pp. 25-39. [4] “Public health problems, immigration and refugees, environmental degradation and broader social and political breakdown are the new security challenges that breed in a context of unattended global inequality. For all our sakes we need to work together to build the framework of a new global society and economy that respect differences, protect the weak and regulate the strong.” Ibidem, p. v-vi. [5] “Despite the ratification by 106 countries of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the discouraging fact remains that over 1 billion people live in absolute poverty, some 180 million children suffer from serious malnutrition, 1.5 billion persons are deprived of primary health care and a safe water supply, 2 billion individuals lack safe sanitation and over 1 billion adults cannot read or write. While these dismaying statistics can in no way reveal fully the personal, family and community tragedies each represents, the clear global tendency shows these numbers escalating, not decreasing.” UN, Commission on Human Rights, Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, The Realization of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Final report submitted by Mr. Danilo Türk, Special Rapporteur, (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16) 3 July 1992 [6] See: UNDP. 1999. Human Development Report 1999, Oxford University Press, New York, 1999; A/55/342, para. 46. [7] E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/13, para. 30-40; A/55/342. para 46-47. [8] E/CN.4/Sub.2/1992/16, para. 103. [9] Watson, C. 2003, ‘Sell the rain – How the privatization of water caused riots in Cochahamba, Bolivia’, CBS News (Online), Available at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/water/bolivia.html [10] See: E/CN.4/Sub.2/2000/13 [11] Razavi, Sh. 2001, ‘Globalization, Employment and Women’s Empowerment’, Division for the Advancement of Women (DAW), Expert Group Meeting, 26-29 November 2001, New Delhi, India, p. 40. [12] Richard Falk associates, although overly simple, the WTO hierarchy and its ideological and political support with “globalisation-from-above”, and the protesters in the streets of Seattle during the meeting of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1999 and their governmental allies with “globalisation-from-bellow”. He argues that globalization "from above" is eroding worker rights and social protections, but globalization "from below" is creating an emergent global civil society. Falk, R. 2002, ‘Interpreting the Interaction of Global Markets and Human Rights’ in Globalization and Human Rights. A. Brysk, ed. Berkeley: University of California Press [13] Joekes, S.P, 1995. ‘Trade-related Employment for Women in Industry and Services in Developing Countries’, in United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women Occasional Paper No. 5, Geneva: UNRISD. [14] See: Joekes, S. P. (Ed.) 1987, Women in the World Economy: an INSTRAW Study, Oxford University Press: New York [15] Ibidem. [16] Source of data: UNECE, 1999, Economic Survey for Europe 1999, UNECE: Geneva; Ruminska-Zimny, E. 2002, ‘Gender, Privatisation and Structural Adjustment in the Transition Countries: Trends and Issues in the UNECE Region’ in Transition, Privatisation and Women, ed. M. Dokmanovic, Women’s Centre for Democracy and Human Rights: Subotica
|
 |
