How are governments approaching the challenge of implementing Copenhagen commitments in the contemporary global context? Addressing the 29th ICSW International Conference on Social Welfare, Capetown, South Africa, October 23-27, 2000, two spokespersons, one from a Southern and one from a Northern government shared their perspectives and proposals.
Excerpts from their presentations are presented below.

Jamaica

Globalization and the poor: Strategies for the future
Faith D. Innerarity
Director, Social Security,
Ministry of Labour and Social Security, Jamaica

“The greatest social problems of all – those which affect every person on earth, in every country – are not problems internal to any particular country: they are international problems, which derive from the fact that all countries, from the largest, virtual continents like the USA … and China, to the smallest micro state such as Nauru (Population 8,000) or Dominica (population 80,000) are only parts of a world-system of society.”

This assertion by Peter Worsley (1992) may appear exaggerated but it aptly captures the importance of global relations in the world today.

Globalization as process

It is indisputable that globalization has been the dominant force in the last decade of the 20th century.

As noted at the 1996 Copenhagen Seminar on Social Progress: “This surge of a global economy was made possible by the loosening and often suppression of regulations established by most countries to control trade, investment, and financial transactions. Initiated in the 1950s this movement, known as ‘deregulation’ gained a very strong momentum in the 1970s swept through Europe and Asia in the 1980s, and is still progressing … World Affairs are discussed and decisions affecting the human condition are increasingly taken within an economic framework and with the objective of establishing a global market’.”

As stated in the Human development Report 1997: “Proceeding at breakneck speed without map or compass, globalization has helped reduce poverty in some of the largest and strongest economies – China, India and some of the Asian tigers. But it has also produced losers among and within countries. As trade and foreign investments have expanded, the developing world has seen a widening gap between winners and losers...

A rising tide of wealth is supposed to lift all boats, but some are more seaworthy than others, the yachts and ocean liners are rising in response to new opportunities, but many rafts and rowboats are taking on water- and some are sinking.

The ratio of global trade to GDP has been rising over the past decade but it has been fallen for 44 developing countries with more than a billion people. The least developed countries with 10% of the world’s people have only 0.3% of world trade – half their share of two decades ago”.

In Addition:

• More than half of all developing countries have been bypassed by foreign direct investment, two-thirds of which has gone to only eight developing countries.
• Real commodity prices in the 1990’s were 45% lower than those in the 1980’s – and 10% lower than the lowest level during the Great Depression reached in 1932.
  
• The terms of trade for the least developed countries have declined a cumulative 50% over the last 25 years...

The extent of the inequalities in an increasingly globalized world is demonstrated by:

• The share of poorest 20% of the world people in global income now stands at 1.1%, down from 1.4% in 1991 and 2.3% in 1960.
  
• The ratio of the income of the top 20% to that of the poorest 20% rose from 30 to 1 in 1960 to 61 to 1 in 1991 a new high of 78 to 1 in 1994.

The question has been raised as to whether ‘globalization is a great opportunity or a great threat, a fresh breeze or a violent hurricane for poorer nations’.

Reducing poverty and inequality: strategies to deal with globalization

Globalization has been regarded as beneficial ...It has, however, been associated with widening disparities, in that, benefits and opportunities remain highly concentrated among a relatively small number of countries and are spread unevenly within them. Against the backdrop of the Asian financial crisis of 1997 – 1998 (the fifth serious international monetary and financial crisis is just two decades), globalization means for many people vulnerability to unfamiliar and unpredictable forces that can bring on economic instability and social dislocation within a very short time span.

There is also mounting anxiety that Globalization threatens the integrity of cultures and the sovereignty of states. Such anxieties are not only expressed in developing countries but also in powerful countries of the developed world.

As expressed in the Report of the Secretary General to the United Nations Millennium Summit, there is a clear and central message: “Globalization must mean more than creating bigger markets. The economic sphere cannot be separated from the more complex fabric of social and political life. A global economy must have a more solid foundation in shared values and – it must advance broader and more inclusive, social purposes.”

This goal of integrating economic and social policies, was indeed a major thrust of the of the World Social Summit in 1995... The following are issues for consideration in moving the process forward:

• Governments in pursuing orthodox macroeconomic and financial policies directed toward integration into global capitalism, must have a complementary set of policies which recognize ethical concerns and provide an agenda for social reform that includes better distribution of assets and economic opportunities leading to the reduction and eventual reduction of poverty...
  
• Reform of the current international financial architecture is essential if the benefits of globalization are to be more equitably distributed. The need for this reform was identified in the Report of the Task Force of the Executive Committee on Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations in January 1999.

This report highlighted, among other things, the need for the reform of the IMF aimed at providing adequate liquidity in times of crisis, the adoption of codes of conduct, improved information and financial supervision and regulation at national and international levels; and the preservation of the autonomy of developing and transition economics with regard to capital account issues. These recommendations need to be pursued with much greater urgency.

• The debt is one of the greatest obstacles to development and poverty reduction. There is need for faster and more far reaching debt relief and debt cancellation measures than those embodied in HIPC... Such measures are required not only for the highly indebted poor countries but also for middle-income countries with severe debt problems.
  
• Elimination of unfair international trading practices, especially in respect of agricultural commodities, which are disadvantageous to developing countries and in many instances, put in jeopardy the livelihood of small-scale producers who account for a major segment of the rural poor.
  
• The issue of intellectual property rights must not be used to make technology inaccessible to developing countries, through prohibitive costs or otherwise.
  
• The devastating impact of financial of crises on levels of poverty and social stability, means serious consideration must be given to mechanisms to discourage excessive financial speculation particularly as it relates to currency transactions. In this respect more effort must be dedicated to the study of proposals for a currency transaction tax (CTT).
  
• Social protection systems must be strengthened to meet the needs of the most vulnerable as well as the transitory poor within a globalized context, which makes countries more open to external economic shocks. Attention must be paid to the establishment of formal social security systems, in countries of the developing world where informal systems of social protection are proving inadequate as they come under demographic, economic and social pressures.
  
• Massive investments in human capital, beyond just the provision of basic social services in the areas of education and health.
  
• Social capital, including networks involving NGO’s and other actors in civic society are central for social development.
  
• Mobilization of resources at the international level, whether through ODA, the 20/20 initiative or other international cooperation measures are essential and must underpin the notions of global solidarity.

According to the UNDP Human Development Report 1997: “… to provide universal access to basic social services and transfers to alleviate income poverty would – with efficient targeting – cost roughly $80 billion. That is less than 0.5% of global income and less than the combined net worth of the seven richest men in the world”.

As the report therefore concludes: “… lack of... commitment, not financial resources, is the real obstacle to poverty eradication. Eradicating absolute poverty is eminently affordable.”

If we are to successfully rise to the challenge of creating more just and equitable societies, we must find this commitment.

Germany

Social Services: A Driving Force Behind Social Development
Christine Bergmann
Federal Minister for Family, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth

As a politician from East Germany I am particularly conscious of the difficulties of this task. We in Germany still have some way to go to meet the challenge of creating comparable living conditions throughout Germany, reuniting in the social, economic and also psychological sense two societies that for decades had been cast in very different moulds.

The European dimension

Germany has to solve her problems in this field in concert with her partners in the European Union. The European Union and its Member States have given the signal to emerge into the 21th century in the field of social policy. We accept and respond to the major changes and challenges that our societies are confronted with. The key terms in the European debate on the future shape of social and economic policies are modernisation and quality. Social policy is becoming a real issue of the European Union.

Europe has nailed its colours to the mast: Social development is the political response to the global society in which we live. Real economic progress in a globalized world is impossible without progress in the social field. The partitiona between the different actors in the areas of economic and social policies and civil society have to disappear.

The fight in Europe between those who do not want to change anything and use tradition as an excuse and those who want to demolish 150 years of social progress is over.

The new goal is to strengthen employment, economic reform and social cohesion as part of a knowledge-based economy. Achieving this goal requires an overall strategy aimed at, among other things, modernising the European social model, investing in people and combating social exclusion.

A new open method of co-ordinating national policies will be introduced at all levels.

Subsidiarity: a positive approach

A lot of biased statements have been made on the issues of subsidiarity and European social legislation in the last ten years. Social policies were reproached for imposing an excessive burden on the economy and on production costs. Today a positive concept of subsidiarity is emerging and social policy actors on the national and European levels start moving along the same lines.

There is a European consensus that national and local governments primarily have the responsibility to ensure that social services are available to all people. In many countries civil society, particularly social NGOs play a major role in planning, organising and providing social services. The European Union, however, should play a more important role when it comes to fostering social development by organising and intensifying the co-operation between Member States in this field.

While the solutions may differ, they are all taken against the background of similar challenges and changes that are to a large extent triggered off by demographic trends. The EU-membership will be extended to new countries in the near future. Last but not least the volume of cross border delivery of services will increase as part of the free movement of services between member states. The subsequent increases and shifts in demands for social services take place in all European countries.

Our understanding of these changes and their impact on social services is insufficient. For this reason Germany has set up an observatory for social services in Europe that shall provide an empirical base of comparable and current information. The observatory is also a platform for the exchange of opinions and experiences aimed at advising policymakers on the local and national level as well as non governmental social organisation. This in turn will help them to address the challenges and changes in a systematic manner.

In order to reinforce the European Employment Strategy we have to more closely involve the local economic and social actors. In Germany, the voluntary welfare organisations employ 1.3 million professional social workers. The growth rate of the non-profit social sector in the past 20 years exceeds that of any other part of the economy. While placing the expansion of productive employment at the centre of sustainable development we give more attention to the quantity and quality of social service jobs offered by local authorities and social non-governmental organisations.

Quality social services: roles for governments and for NGOs

At the World Summit for Social Development, held at Copenhagen in 1995, it was recognized that good quality social services contribute to the welfare of societies. Copenhagen “plus 5” has reiterated and underlined the importance of social services. Scarce domestic resources, changing consumer expectations and the growing number of competitors force providers to focus on improving the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of their services. This confronts local authorities and social NGOs, which help to secure access to services for all people, with a complex task.

Modernising and improving the quality of social services constitutes a constant challenge for service providers. There are numerous quality aspects that have to be considered. Criteria have to be established for evaluating social services. Services should meet desired standards and respond adequately to the needs of users. Local authorities need to establish an integrated system of social services. It is not easy for providers to make ends meet.

Local authorities and national governments have to create an environment that is favourable for non profit service provider. There are, however, a number of reasons why we are well advised to also include social NGOs into a competition of quality, while protecting them from the fatal consequences of a drop-off in prices. There are numerous kinds of services, such as drug counselling or assistance to homeless people, that will not be offered by profit-oriented agencies. The users of social services have a limited capacity to exercise their rights as consumers. Privatisation and commercialisation of service provision may put the users of services at a disadvantage or even limit the range and scope of the system. The state should, therefore, take an active role in strengthening the position of users of social services provided by public bodies, voluntary non-profit making agencies and profit oriented organisations. The market has to be regulated in order to maintain the diversity among providers.

Implementing the Copenhagen Programme of Action in every respect will be a costly effort for many states. This holds true, in particular, for the goal to provide high-quality services for all. How can governments of developing countries possibly afford to pay for universal provision of services? We have to recognise that a lack of human development very often underlies a lack of services. Investing resources in social services will eventually result in economic growth. It is important for the purpose of deciding the range and scope of a system of service provision that one views resources broadly. Different social actors and business capacities have to be involved. In Germany, about 3 million volunteers support the work of the non-profit social service providers. I am convinced that it will prove worthwhile for developing countries, too, to invest in a system of social services that covers all people while targeting extra subsidies to the poor.

Social services: a female-dominated labour market

The empowerment and full participation of women is a priority objective of our national policy. While women are often adversely affected by social and economic change, they often bear the major burden of paid and unpaid social work. Services should, therefore, also be designed to serve the specific needs of girls and women.

There are numerous gender aspects involved in the provision of social services. Financial constraints and structural changes in social services often have a greater effect on women than on men. Poverty of older people is in most cases female poverty. NGOs and public bodies should take into account female life situations and should involve women in the planning, decision-making, management and implementation of services. For instance, financial support and social counselling have to be closely linked in order to avoid single mothers, that means female-headed families suffering from a number of disadvantages. They depend on agencies that provide individual support covering all facets of their particular life situation.

Social services can be described as a female-dominated labour market. One reason why these jobs are highly attractive for women is that they offer part-time work and thus help to reconcile work and family life. The disadvantage, however, is that these are low-paid jobs. Training and qualification programmes must therefore ensure equal participation of women aimed at enhancing their career prospects.

Copenhagen, Geneva and beyond: a job for all countries

Social services are an essential element of social development in all countries at different stages in their overall development process. The Member States of the United Nations committed themselves to a number of key goals and principles with regard to the provision of social services. It is important to note that the implementation of what has been agreed does not apply only to a limited number of countries but it represents a topical response to global challenges.