Decon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage iDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage iiBob DeaconDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage iii Bob Deacon 2007First published 2007Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of researchor private study, or criticism or review, as permittedunder the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, thispublication may be reproduced, stored or transmittedin any form, or by any means, only with the priorpermission in writing of the publishers, or in the case ofreprographic reproduction, in accordance with the termsof licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those termsshould be sent to the publishers.SAGE Publications Ltd1 Olivers Yard55 City RoadLondon EC1Y 1SPSAGE Publications Inc.2455 Teller RoadThousand Oaks, California 91320SAGE Publications India Pvt LtdB 1/1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial AreaMathura Road, New Delhi 110 044IndiaSAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd33 Pekin Street #02-01Far East SquareSingapore 048763British Library Cataloguing in Publication dataA catalogue record for this book is availablefrom the British LibraryISBN 978-1-4129-0761-3ISBN 978-1-4129-0762-0 (pbk)Library of Congress Control Number: 2006931639Typeset by C&M Digitals (P) Ltd., Chennai, IndiaPrinted on paper from sustainable resourcesPrinted and bound in Great Britain by The Cromwell Press Ltd, Trowbridge, WiltshireDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage ivForVappu Taipalefor having the vision to support global social policy analysisDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage vDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage viList of figures and tablesixAcknowledgements xThe structure of the book xiAbbreviations and acronyms xiiIntroduction11 The international and global dimensions of social policy 3Social policy 4Globalisation 8Globalisations impact upon social policy 9Studying and understanding social policy in a global context 132 The social policy of the World Bank 24Overview of Chapters 2, 3 and 4 24The World Bank: from targeted poverty alleviation, throughpension privatisation and public service effectivenessto empowering people? 263 The social policy of the IMF, the WTO and the OECD 46The IMF: from structural adjustment to the poverty reductionand growth facility 46The WTO: is trade creep undermining international social standards and privatising public services? 49OECD: neo-liberal stalking horse in Paris or balancer of social and economic objectives? 574 The social policy of the UN and its social agencies 63The ILO: promoting and defending international social security and labour standards? 63The WHO: from health for all to health markets for all? 68UNESCO: the case for humanistic education swimming against the tide? 72ContentsDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage viiviii ContentsUNDP: facilitating the realisation of the Millennium Development Goals 74UNDESA: from side show to the Bank and UN social agencies to lead formulator of UN social policies? 81UNICEF: childrens rights as a vehicle for global social reformist policies? 85Conclusion: contending views, differential clout 865 The social policy of international non-state actors 88Global think tanks, policy advocacy coalitions, knowledge networks and epistemic communities 88INGOs and consulting companies 93The global business view on social policy 97Global social movements and social policy 1006 Global redistribution, regulation and rights 109The rise of global social policy 109Global redistribution 111Global regulation 127Global social rights 135Conclusion 1407 The governance of global and regional social policy 142Institutional fragmentation and competition 142Radical and ambitious global social governance reform 144Viable and likely developments in global social governance 1498 Conclusions and implications for the analysis and future of social policy nationally and globally 169Global social policy overview 169The analysis of social policy in a global context: beyond welfare regimes and comparative frameworks 174A multi-sited, multi-actor, multi-level global social reformist strategy to make the world a fairer place 177References 194Index 215Decon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage viiiFigure1.1Global conflicts of interest and global social policy 21Tables1.1.Welfare regimes in the developed world 61.2.The global welfare mix 123.1.WTO agreements impinging upon aspects of health policy 525.1.The global welfare mix: the intermediate sphere 946.1.Cost of meeting the MDGs and current ODA projections 1176.2.Alternative forms of international taxation and revenue raising 1207.1.Social functions of governance at national, regional and global level 1467.2.Current and radically reformed institutions of global social governance 147Figures and TablesDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage ixIn addition to thanking the many international civil servants I have conversed withandmyFinnishGASPPcolleagues(MeriKoivusalo,EevaOllila,MinnaIlva),Iwant to express a special thanks to the following for their continued belief in thevalue of what I have been writing and for the many ideas stolen over glasses of wineandpintsofbeer:GerryLavery,SantoshMehrotra,GuyStanding,PaulStubbs,TimoVoipioandNicolaYeates.ForemotionalandnurturingsupportIwanttothank my wife Lynda, the six (I hasten to add grown-up) children we have betweenus,andmyfather-in-lawanddog-carerReg,whorefreshinglydoesntagreewithmuchthatIhavetosay!ThankstomystudentsatSheffielduponwhomIhavetried out half-baked ideas. Thanks also to Alexandra, one of my PhD students, forreading every word and commenting. And thanks go to two anonymous referees forhelpful suggestions, and to Zo Elliott and Anna Luker at SAGE for being patient.Holly HouseSkipwith20 July 2006Every effort has been made to trace all the copyright holders, but if any have beeninadvertentlyoverlookedthepublisherswillbepleasedtomakethenecessaryarrangement at the first opportunity.Table1.2isfromGough,I.andWoods,G.(eds)(2004)InsecurityandWelfareRegimesinAsia,AfricaandLatinAmerica.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Table5.1isfromStubbs,P.(2003)InternationalNon-StateActorsandSocialDevelopment Policy, Global Social Policy, 3(3): 31948.Table6.1isfromOxfam(2005)Gleneagles:WhatReallyHappenedattheG8Summit. Briefing Notes.Table 6.2 is adapted from Atkinson, A. (ed.) (2005) New Sources of DevelopmentFinance. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.BypermissionofOxfordUniversityPress.AcknowledgementsDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xChapter 1 defines both social policy and globalisation and considers the ramificationsofglobalisationonthemakingandstudyofsocialpolicyatnationalandgloballevel. Chapter 2 reviews the social policies of the World Bank. Chapter 3 does thesame for the IMF, the WTO and the OECD. Chapter 4 does the same for the UNincludingitssocialagencies,theILO,WHO,UNESCO,UNDP,UNDESA,andUNICEF. Chapter 5 examines the social policies being argued for by internationalnon-state actors including global think tanks, knowledge network, global businessand global civil society. Chapter 6 turns specifically to global social policy under-stood as supranational social policy. Emerging mechanisms of global redistribution,global social regulation and global social rights articulation are reviewed. Chapter7 examines the effectiveness and legitimacy of the global social governance institu-tions and process responsible for evolving and implementing global social policies.Severalglobalsocialgovernancereformpropositionsareexaminedindetail.Finally,Chapter8 considerstheimplicationsofallthathasgonebeforefortheanalysis of social policy in a global context and for the political strategies requiredfor ensuring greater social justice within and between states.There is a close link between the structure of this book and the structure of theGlobalSocialPolicyDigestthatispublishedeveryfourmonthsinthejournalGlobalSocialPolicy.Apre-publicationdraftversionofthisDigestappearsatwww.gaspp.orgfromwhichlivelinkstoweb-basedsourcesusedareavailable.Icantstressenoughtheimportanceoffollowingupmostchaptersbyreadingthelater policy developments monitored in the Digest, which I also edit. Indeed, at thetimeofwriting(Summer2006),excitingdevelopmentsaretakingplace,noneofwhich will have come to fruition by the time I send this to the publishers. Amongthese are the High Level Panel sitting to propose reforms to streamline the UN, thedrafting by UNDESA of a set of social policy guidance notes for countries, and theimminent collapse of the Doha WTO round which would be celebrated by many inthe Global South. The linkages are: Chapter 2, 3, 4, 5: Digest section International actors and social policyChapter 3 WTO section: Digest section Trade and social policyChapter 6: Digest section Global social policies: redistribution, regulation and rights Chapter 7: Digest section Global social governanceWeb addresses at the end of each chapter were correct at the time of publication.Any updates will be made when the book is reprinted.The Structure of the BookDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xiADB Asian Development BankAIDC Alternative Information and Development CentreAIDS Aquired Immune Deficiency SyndromeAPEC Asian Pacific Economic CooperationASEAN Association of South East Asian NationsASEM Asia Europe MeetingsAU African UnionBIAC Business and Industry Advisory Council (OECD)CAN Community of Andean NationsCCMs Country Coordinating MechanismsCDF Comprehensive Development FrameworkCEDAW Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against WomenCERD Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial DiscriminationCERI Centre for Educational Research and InnovationCESCR Committee on Economic Social and Cultural RightsCLASCO Latin American Council of Social ServicesCODESRIA West African Council of Social SciencesCRC Convention on the Rights of the ChildCROP Comparative Research Programme on PovertyCSD Commission for Social DevelopmentCSI Coalition of Service Industries (in USA)CSR Corporate Social ResponsibilityCUT Central Trade Union Federation (of Brazil)DAWN Development Alternatives with Women for a New EraDFID Department for International DevelopmentECLAC Economic Commission for Latin America and CaribbeanECOSOC United Nations Economic and Social CouncilEDRC Economic Development Review CommitteeEFA Education For AllEFA-FTI EFA Fast Track InitiativeESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the PacificESSD Environmentally and Socially Sustainable DevelopmentETI Ethical Trading InitiativeEU European UnionFDI Foreign Direct InvestmentAbbreviations and AcronymsDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xiixiii Abbreviations and AcronymsFPSI Finance, Private Sector and InfrastructureFTAA Free Trade Area of the AmericasFTO Fair Trade OrganisationG7/G8 Group of seven/eight industrial nations (Canada, France, Italy Germany,Japan, UK and USA, G8 is G7 plus Russia)G20(N) Group of twenty developed nationsG20(S) Group of twenty developing countriesG77 Group of seventy seven developing countriesGAPS General Agreement on Public ServicesGASPP Globalism and Social Policy ProgrammeGATS General Agreement on Trade in ServicesGATT General Agreement on Tariffs and TradeGAVI Global Alliance for Vaccination and ImmunisationGCC Global Corporate CitizenshipGDP Gross Domestic ProductGDN Global Development NetworksGINS Global Issues NetworksGCIM Global Commission on International MigrationGNI Gross National IncomeGNP Gross National ProductGPPN Global Public Policy NetworksGSM Global Social MovementsHD Human Development NetworkHDI Human Development IndexHDR Human Development ReportHIPC Heavily Indebted Poor CountriesHRC Human Rights Committee (now Council)IADB Inter American Development BankIBASE Brazilian Institute of Social and Economic AnalysisIBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and DevelopmentICC International Chamber of CommerceICCs International Consulting CompaniesICCPR International Covenant on Civil and political RightsICEDAW International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of DiscriminationAgainst WomenICERD InternationalConventionontheEliminationofallformsofRacialDiscriminationICESCR International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural RightsICFTU International Confederation of Free Trade UnionsICU International Clearing UnionIDA International Development AssociationIDB Inter-American Development BankIDPF International Drug Purchasing FacilityIFC International Finance CorporationIFF International Finance FacilityIFFIm International Finance Facility for ImmunisationILO International Labour OrganisationDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xiiixiv Abbreviations and AcronymsILOSES ILOs Social and Economic Security ProgrammeIMF International Monetary FundIMO International Organisation on MigrationINGO International Non-Governmental OrganisationISO International Standards OrganisationKNETs Knowledge NetworksMDGs Millennium Development GoalsMEI Multilateral Economic InstitutionsMERCOSUR MercadoComundelConoSur(CommonMarketoftheSouthernCone)MOST Management of Social Transformation Programme (of UNESCO)NGO Non-Governmental OrganisationNHRIs National Human Rights InstitutionsNHS National Health ServiceOCS Operational Core ServicesODA Official Development AssistanceODC Overseas Development Co-operationOECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentOECD:DAC OECDs Development Assistance CommitteeOHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human RightsOMC Open Method of CoordinationPAYG Pay-As-You-GoPHARE Poland and Hungary Aid in Reconstructing the EconomyPPPs Public Private PartnershipsPREM Poverty Reduction and Economic ManagementPRGF Poverty Reduction and Growth FacilityPRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy PapersPSI Poverty Strategies InitiativeSA8000 Social Accountability 8000SAARC South Asia Association for Regional CooperationSADC Southern African Development CooperationSAI Social Accountability InternationalSAPRIN Structural Adjustment Participatory Review InitiativeSARN South Asian Research NetworkSARS Severe Acute Respiratory SyndromeSDD Social Development Department (of the World Bank)SDRs Special Drawing RightsSPS Agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measuresof the GATTSPS Social Protection Section (of World Bank)SPSP Social Protection Strategy PaperSRM Social Risk ManagementTBT Technical Barriers to TradeTFESSD Trust Fund for Environmentally and Socially Sustainable DevelopmentTNC Transnational CorporationTNI Transnational InstituteTRIPS Trade Related Intellectual Property RightsDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xivTUAC Trade Union Advisory Committee (to OECD)TWN Third World NetworkUDHR Universal Declaration of Human RightsUKDFID United Kingdoms Department for International DevelopmentUN United NationsUNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and DevelopmentUNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and DevelopmentUNDESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social AffairsUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNDPTCDC UNDPs Programme for Technical Co-operation between DevelopingCountriesUNEP United Nations Environment ProgrammeUNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural OrganisationUNHCR United Nations High Commission for RefugeesUNHDR United Nations Human Development ReportUNICEF United Nations Childrens FundUNIDO United Nations International Development OfficeUNRISD United Nations Research Institute for Social DevelopmentUNUCRIS United Nations University Centre for Regional Integration StudiesUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentWDR World Development ReportWEF World Economic ForumWFTU World Federation of Trade UnionsWHA World Health AssemblyWHO World Health OrganizationWSF World Social ForumWTO World Trade Organisationxv Abbreviations and AcronymsDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xvDecon-3507-Prelims.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage xviIntroductionThis book is about global social policy. Global social policy consists of two things:first, it is the social policy prescriptions for national social policy being articulatedby global actors such as international organisations; second, it is the emerging supra-national social policies and mechanisms of global redistribution, global social regu-lation and global social rights. This book is also about the global social governanceof these two elements of global social policy.It is a textbook for students of social policy, social development, internationalrelationsandglobalisationamongothers.Itreviewsinonevolumetheextenttowhichinternationalactorsofmanykindsarenowinvolvedintheformulationofsocial policies for countries, and in the creation of an embryonic system of supra-national social policy and governance both at regional and global level. It is also anargument for an alternative to neo-liberal globalisation, for a reformed globalisationthat is capable of addressing the social dimension of globalisation. It is an argumentfor a more systematic approach to global redistribution, global social regulation andglobal social rights. But it is, I hope, no simple restatement of the European casefor global social reformism against the USA-supported neo-liberal case for globalmarket freedom. The book tries to come to terms also with the voice of the GlobalSouth in the current debates about whether to and how to reform the institutions ofglobal social governance. One result of this is its defence of the idea of supranationalregionalsocialpolicy.Thebookisalsoareportofaresearchprogramme.Since1997IhavehadthegoodfortunetodirecttheGlobalismandSocialPolicyProgramme(GASPP)thathasbeenfundedmostlybytheFinnstodotwothings:review evidence about the impact of globalisation upon national social policy andwelfare states, and to begin to articulate an alternative to neo-liberal globalisation.Seven international GASPP seminars were organised between 1997 and 2004 thathelped develop the thinking of the GASPP team. Within the GASPP programme aseries of sub-projects have been undertaken by myself and colleagues focusing upontheroleofINGOsininternationalsocialpolicy,theemergenceofpublicprivatepartnershipsininternationalhealthpolicy,theexternalpolicyoftheEuropeanUnion,theroleofconsultingcompaniesininternationalpolicydiffusion,theDecon-3507-Introduction.qxd2/23/200711:28 AMPage 1innovations taking place in global social governance, the impact of trade measures onsocial policy, the social dimension of regionalism and more besides. It is the collectiveresearch effort that informs aspects of this book. The book is also a reflection uponwhat I have learned about these questions as a result of being a participant in about40conferences,workshops,seminarsandconsultingprojectsduringthepasttenyears, addressing aspects of global social policy and its governance organised by theWorld Bank, ILO, WHO, UNICEF, UNDP, UNESCO, UNDESA, UNRISD and theEU. Without this engagement with and conversations with international social policy-makers the book could not have been written.In one sense this book is a tribute toall of those hidden from view, international civil servants and intellectuals within andaround these organisations who have, in my view, been largely responsible (within thebroaderpoliticalcontextsetbytheanti-globalisationmovements)forturningtheglobal social policy ideas tide away from the domination in the 1980s and 1990s oftargeted poverty alleviation towards the renewed defence of universal access to high-quality public services.Thisbookisnotprimarilyabouthowglobalisationhasimpactedonparticularcountries. It is not about the extent to which some welfare states have survived andsomehavebeenchangedbyglobalneo-liberaleconomicpressures.Therearenowmanybooksonthistopic,anindicationofafewisgivenattheendofthefirstchapter. This book is rather about the global politics of welfare as articulated at thesupranational level. Of course, this global political process impacts down on particu-lar countries and some indications of this is given in the book. Another book wouldbe needed to review the country-specific operational activities and impacts on specificcountries of the World Bank, the UNDP, the ILO and INGOs.2 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Introduction.qxd2/23/200711:28 AMPage 21The International and GlobalDimensions of Social PolicyThis chapter Provides a number of ways of thinking about social policy Provides a number of ways of thinking about globalisation Reviews five ways in which globalisation influences social policy Reviews the ways of thinking about social policy in the light of globalisations impact Offers an explanatory framework for national and global social policy change in the contextof globalisation.Thisbookisaboutsocialpolicyandglobalisationandthewaysinwhichthecontemporaryprocessesofglobalisationimpactuponsocialpolicy.Socialpolicyishere understood as both a scholarly activity and the actual practice of governmentsand other agencies that affect the social welfare of populations. An important argu-ment of this book is that neither the scholarly activity of social policy analysis nor theactual practice of social policy-making can avoid taking account of the current glob-alisation of economic, social and political life. This is true in two quite distinct senses.In terms of the social policies of individual countries, global processes impact uponthecontentofcountrypolicies.Equallyimportant,theglobalisationofeconomicsocial and political life brings into existence something that is recognisable as supra-national social policy either at the regional level or at the global level. Social policywithinonecountrycannolongerbeunderstoodormadewithoutreferencetotheglobal context within which the country finds itself. Many social problems that socialpolicies are called upon to address have global dimensions, such that they now requiresupranational policy responses. One of the arguments of the book is that since about1980wehavewitnessedtheglobalisationofsocialpolicyandthesocialisationofglobal politics. By the last phrase is meant the idea that agendas of the G8 are increas-ingly filled with global poverty or health issues.Decon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 3Social policySocial policy as a field of study and analysis is often regarded as the poor relation ofother social sciences such as economics, sociology and political science. It is dismissedas a practical subject concerned only with questions of social security benefits or theadministration of health care systems. Some of those who profess the subject wouldinsisttothecontrary,thatbycombiningtheinsightsofeconomics,sociologyandpoliticalscienceandothersocialsciencestoaddressthe questionofhowthesocialwellbeing of the worlds peoples is being met, it occupies a superior position in termsof the usefulness of its analytical frameworks and its normative concerns with issuesof social justice and human needs. Social policy as sector policyThe subject area or field of study of social policy may be defined in a number of waysthat compliment each other. At one level it is about policies and practices to do withhealth services, social security or social protection, education and shelter or housing.While the field of study defined in this sectoral policy way was developed in the con-textofmoreadvancedwelfarestates,itisincreasinglybeingappliedtodevelopingcountries (Hall and Midgley, 2004; Mkandawire, 2005). When applied in such con-texts, the focus needs to be modified to bring utilities (water and electricity) into theframe and to embrace the wide range of informal ways in which less developed soci-eties ensure the wellbeing of their populations (Gough and Woods, 2004). It is one ofthe arguments of this book that whereas social policy used to be regarded as the studyof developed welfare states and development studies as the study of emerging welfarestates,thisseparationdiddamagetoboththeunderstandingwithindevelopmentstudies of how welfare states developed and to the actual social policies in the contextof development that have too often had merely a pro-poor focus, to the detriment ofissues of equity and universalism.Social policy as redistribution, regulationand rightsAnother approach to defining the subject area is to say that social policy within onecountrymaybeunderstoodasthosemechanisms,policiesandproceduresusedbygovernments, working with other actors, to alter the distributive and social outcomesof economic activity. Redistribution mechanisms alter, usually in a way that makesmore equal the distributive outcomes of economic activity. Regulatory activity framesand limits the activities of business and other private actors, normally so that they takemore account of the social consequences of their activities. The articulation and legis-lation of rights leads to some more or less effective mechanisms to ensure that citizensmight access their rights. Social policy within one country is made up, then, of socialredistribution,socialregulationandthepromulgationofsocialrights.Socialpolicywithintheworldsmostadvancedregionalco-operation(theEU)alsoconsistsofsupranational mechanisms of redistribution across borders, regulation across bordersand a statement of rights that operates across borders. 4 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 4Social policy as social issuesYet another approach to defining the subject area of social policy is to list the kindsof issues social policy analysts address when examining a countrys welfare arrange-ments. In other words, social policy as a subject area is what social policy scholars do.A standard social policy text (Alcock et al., 2003) lists among the concepts of concernto social policy analysts: social needs and social problems, equality rights and socialjustice, efficiency, equity and choice, altruism, reciprocity and obligation and divi-sion, difference and exclusion. These are elaborated below. Social justice: What is meant by this concept, and how have or might governmentsand other actors secure it for their populations? Possible trade-offs between eco-nomic efficiency and equity appear here. Mechanisms of rationing or targeting areincluded. Social citizenship: Whereas other social sciences are concerned with civil and polit-ical aspects of citizenship, social policy analysts focus upon the social rights of cit-izens. What social rights might members of a territorial space reasonably expecttheir governments to ensure access to? Universality and diversity: How might social justice and access to social citizen-shiprightsbesecuredforallinwaysthatalsorespectdiversityanddifference?Issues of multicultural forms of service provision arise, as do policies to combatdiscrimination and ensure equality of opportunity and agency. Autonomyandguarantees:Towhatextentdosocialpolicesfacilitatetheautonomousarticulationofsocialneedsbyindividualsandgroupsandenablethem to exercise choice and influence over provision? How can such an approachbe reconciled with guaranteed provision from above? Agencyofprovision:Shouldthestate,market,organisationsofcivilsociety,the family and kin provide for the welfare needs of the population, and in whatproportion? Who cares: Should the activity of caring be a private matter (more often than notdonebywomenformen,childrenanddependants)orapublicmatterwithinwhich the state plays a role and the issue of the gender division of care becomes apublic policy issue? More broadly, social policy analysts are concerned with issuesof altruism and obligation. For whom is one responsible? Social policy as a welfare regime theorySocialpolicyanalystshave,withinthecontextoftheseapproachestothesubject,developed two strands of literature that might usefully be briefly reviewed. One con-cerns the mapping and evaluation of the diverse ways in which countries do provideforthewelfareoftheircitizensandresidents,andtheotheroffersexplanationsofsocialpolicydevelopmentandwelfarestatedifference.Mostattemptstoclassify(OECD)welfarestatesintotypologiesstartwithEsping-Andersens(1990)classicthree-foldtypologyofliberal,corporatistandsocialdemocraticregimes.Thesearedistinguishedintermsoftheirorganisingprinciples,thefundingbasisofprovision,and the impacts of their policies on inequalities. Liberal welfare states such as the USAemphasisemeans-testedallocationstothepoorandagreaterroleforthemarket.5 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 5Corporatist welfare states such as Germany and France are based much more on theBismarckian work-based insurance model with benefits reflecting earned entitlementsthrough length of service. In contrast, social democratic welfare states such as Swedenplace the emphasis on state provision for citizens financed out of universal taxation.The differences may be captured as in Table 1.1.TothismustbeaddedthefouthworldofproductivistwelfaredescribedbyHolliday(2000).Heandothers(Goodmanetal.,1998;RameshandAsher,2000:Rieger and Leibfried, 2003) argued that low welfare expenditure states in East Asiaensured the meeting of welfare needs through a process of state-lead economic plan-ning and highly regulated private provision such as compulsory savings. Here socialrightstobemetbythestatewerenotacentralpartofthesocialpolicydiscourse,rather a concern to encourage family and firm responsibility.Otheranalystshavedrawnattentiontothedegreeofwoman-friendlinessofwelfare states and asked if the diverse regimes meet differently the welfare needs ofcarers. One typology (Siarrof, 1994 in Sainsbury, 1994) distinguishes between: 1 Protestantsocialdemocraticwelfarestates(Sweden)withinwhichthestate substitutes for private care and women find employment in the public service socreated.2 Christian democratic welfare states (France) that support women in their caringfunctions at home but do not make it so easy for women to enter the work forceon equal terms with men. 3 Protestant liberal welfare states (the USA) which offer limited support for caringwork and some help towards equitable access to employment, but much of thisdepends on private provision of services in the marketplace.4 Late female mobilisation welfare states (Greece, Japan) where the issues of access towork and/or support for caring functions have only just entered the policy agenda.These diverse welfare regimes have also been commented on in terms of their ethnicminorityfriendliness.ParticularattentionisfocusedhereontheinsideroutsideraspectoftheethniccitizenshipbasisoftheGermanandJapanesewelfaresystem,comparedwiththeformalequalopportunitiespoliciesandmulti-lingualeducationopportunities provided for in some Scandinavian countries. (For an overview of thiscomparative social policy literature, see Kennet, 2001, Ch. 3.) Goodin et al. (1999) have provided the definitive evaluation of the three worldsof welfare in a longitudinal study of three exemplar countries: The Netherlands (social6 Global Social Policy & GovernanceTable 1.1 Welfare regimes in the developed worldType of welfareOrganisingDecommodificationImpact state principle index upon inequalityLiberal Market Low LowCorporatist Workplace Semi: notionalReflects insurance inequalities at workSocial Democratic Citizenship High: free at pointHighof useNote: See text about productivist welfare states of East AsiaDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 6democratic), Germany (corporatist) and the USA (liberal). They examined empiricallyover time the performance of the three countries on several criteria including the levelofpoverty,thedegreeofsocialexclusion,theefficiencyoftheeconomy,andthecapacity it offered citizens to make life choices. These authors concluded that on allcriteria social democracy was superior to corporatism, which in turn was superior toliberalism.Itisthisempiricalconclusioncombinedwithpeoplesperceptionofthesuccess of such regimes that has led to such a heated controversy about the perceivedthreats to social democracy of the global neo-liberal project.Social policy and explanations of welfarestate developmentEarly work in social policy to account for welfare state development was not readilyabletoexplaindiversity.NeitherthemoralisticorsocialconscienceapproachofTitmuss(1974),northematerialistorlogicofindustrialisationapproachofRimlinger (1971) and Wilensky and Lebeaux (1958) were suited to this task. Accountsthat have offered plausible explanations of diversity among welfare states include thepluralist or politics matters approach of Heidenheimer et al. (1991), the Marxistor class struggle approach of Gough (1979) and the power resource (or democra-tic class struggle) approach of Korpi (1983). From these last two approaches we havelearnedthatsocialdemocraticwelfarestatesareassociatedwithahighdegreeofworking-class mobilisation and political representation, and that liberal welfare statesareassociatedwithanabsenceofthesefactors.Thefashioningofcross-classcoali-tions and solidarities were also an important part of the universal welfare state story.The middle class were brought into (or bought off by) the Scandinavian welfare statesettlementbyensuringhigh-qualityuniversalservicesthatmettheirneedstoo.Inarather different way, the conservative regimes of Germany and France met the needsof a middle class through wage-related benefits that to some extent privileged them.ThesetypesofexplanationwerethendevelopedfurtherbyWilliams(1989,2001,2005) to account not only for the class-related dimensions of welfare states but alsofor the gendered and ethnic-friendly character of welfare states. With the concept ofdiscoursesofwork,family,nation,shearguedthatparticularwelfarestatesettle-mentswereanoutcomenotonlyofclassbutalsoofgenderandethnicconflicts,degreesofmobilisationaroundeachofthese,andtheassociateddiscoursesaroundwork(whoshouldgetitandhowshoulditberewarded?),family(whocaresforwhom and with what support?) and nation (who is an insider and who an outsiderregarding welfare entitlements?) deployed in these conflicts.Thechapternowturnstoaconsiderationoftheglobalisationprocess.Havingdone that, we shall be able to return to these several ways in which we described thesubject area of social policy and ask: Howdoesglobalisationaffectsocialpolicyunderstoodassectorprovisionofservices like health and social protection? How does globalisation alter the way social policy analysts address issues of redis-tribution, regulation and rights? Howdotheissuesofsocialjustice,citizenshiprights,universalityanddiversity,agency of provision and caring responsibilities alter within a global context?7 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 7 Doesglobalisationencouragedevelopedwelfarestatesanddevelopingcountriestoadoptandpreferoneorotherofthediversewelfarestatemodelsthatwereviewed? How might globalisation modify the explanations we offer for social policy devel-opment and what does it do to class, gender and ethnic welfare struggles? GlobalisationHere are two definitions of globalisation: Globalisation may be thought of initially asthewidening,deepeningandspeedingupofworld-wideinterconnectednessinallaspectsofcontemporarylife(Heldetal.,1999);andglobalization[involves]ten-dencies to a world-wide reach, impact, or connectedness of social phenomena or to aworld-encompassing awareness among social actors (Therborn, 2000).Whensocialscientiststalkaboutglobalisationtheyaretalkingaboutaprocesswithin which there is a shrinking of time and space. Social phenomena in one part ofthe world are more closely connected to social phenomena in other parts of the world.This kind of definition that sees cross-border connections as the key to understandingglobalisation has to be distinguished from debates for or against globalisation. Usuallythese debates and conflicts are about particular international polices and practices typically economic ones which may be associated with the wider process of globali-sation but are not a necessary feature of it. These disputes are usually about the formthat globalisation is taking or the politics of globalisation, rather than the fact of timeand space shrinkage. Indeed, this book engages in a debate about the neo-liberal formthat globalisation is taking and the kinds of global and national social policies beingargued for by global actors, but it does not dispute that there is a shrinking of timeand space and that globalisation is in that sense uncontestable and irreversible.Mostcommentatorsagreethatglobalisationembracesanumberofdimensionsincluding the economic, political, productive, social and cultural. Among the aspectsof globalisation which reflect this range of dimensions are: increased flows of foreign capital based on currency trading; significantly increased foreign direct investment in parts of the world; increased world trade with associated policies to reduce barriers to trade; increased share of production associated with transnational corporations; interconnectedness of production globally due to changes in technology; increased movement of people for labour purposes, both legal and illegal; the global reach of forms of communication, including television and the Internet;and the globalisation or MacDonaldisation of cultural life.These processes and other associated phenomena have in turn led to the emergence ofaglobalcivilsocietysharingacommonpoliticalspace.However,whileeconomicactivity has become more global and we have seen the birth of a global civil society,global political institutions tend to lag behind these developments. They are to a largeextent stuck in an earlier historic epoch of inter-governmental agreements. Indeed, thereformofglobalpoliticalinstitutionsandprocessestobettergovernglobalsocialpolicy is an important theme of this book and will be discussed in Chapter 7.8 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 8Held and McGrew (2002a) elaborated a typology of political positions held withregard to globalisation: neoliberals (who welcome the economics of free-market globalisation); liberalinternationalists(whostillseetheworldasessentiallymadeupofstatescollaborating with each other through the UN system); institutional reformers (who consider that aspects of globalisation lead to the needto strengthen and reform aspects of international governance); global transfomers (who see globalisation as an epoch-changing process and seeka socially responsible globalisation with strengthened global social governance); statists/protectionists(whoregardglobalisationasathreatandseektoprotectthrough trade barriers their countrys social development); and radicals of two kinds, Marxists and localists (who want to replace internationalcapitalistglobalisationwitheitherapost-capitalistworldorderortore-nurturelocal production in a sustainable way).The political position taken in this book lies somewhat uncomfortably between theinstitutional reformer and global transformer position, laced with a deal of radicalismof both kinds. Globalisations impact upon social policyThe argument to be developed in this book is that this new globalisation impacts uponthe subject area and practice of social policy in the following ways: Sets welfare states in competition with each other: This raised the spectre (Mishra,1999),butnotnecessarilythereality(Swank,2002),ofaracetothewelfarebottomwherebystatesreducedtheirwelfarecommitmentsforfearoflosingcapital investment. It raises the question as to what type of welfare state or socialpolicybestsuitsinternationalcompetitivenesswithoutunderminingsocialsoli-darity (Scharpf and Schimdt, 2000; Sykes et al., 2001). Evidence is now accumu-latingwhichsuggeststhatintheGlobalNorthequitableapproachestosocialpolicy may be sustainable (Swank, 2002; Castles, 2005), whereas they may not, inconditionsofneoliberalglobalisation,besoeasilyreplicablewithintheGlobalSouth (Chapter 8). Bringsnewplayersintothemakingofsocialpolicy:Internationalorganisations(IOs) such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO and UN agencies such as WHO, ILOandsoonhavebecomemoreinvolvedinprescribingcountrypolicy.Thishasgeneratedaglobaldiscourseaboutdesirablenationalsocialpolicy.Thewithin-country politics of welfare has taken on a global dimension with a struggle of ideasbeingwagedwithinandbetweeninternationalorganisationsastodesirablenational social policy. The battle for pension policy in post-communist countriesbetweentheWorldBankandtheILOisaclassicexample(Deacon,1997;Holzmann et al., 2003; see also Chapters 2, 3 and 4). Raises the issues with which social policy is concerned, those of redistribution, reg-ulation and rights, to a supranational level that has both a regional (EU, ASEAN,MERCOSUR,SADCandsoon)andglobaldimension:Thestrugglebetween9 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 9liberal and social democratic approaches to economic and social policy takes on aglobal and regional dimension. New global social movements enter the picture tooandcontributefrombelowtoaglobalpoliticsofwelfare(OBreinetal.,2000;Yeates,2001;ScholteSchnabel,2002;Munck,2005;Chapter5).Whetherneo-liberal globalisation could and should give way to a social reformist globalisationwithin which global redistribution, regulatory and rights policies and mechanismscan be developed is addressed in Chapter 6. These changes raise a debate aboutthe need for reformed global social governance mechanisms that is addressed inChapter 7. Createsaglobalprivatemarketinsocialprovision: Increasedfreetradehas created the possibility of mainly American and European private health care andhospital providers, education providers, social care agencies and social insurancecompaniesoperatingonaglobalscaleandbenefitingfromaninternationalmiddle-class market in private social provision. The implication of this developmentfor sustaining cross-class solidarities within one country in the context of develop-mentisdiscussedinChapter3.Researchonthisissuewillbeexaminedthere(Sexton, 2001; Mackintosh and Koivusalo, 2005; Chavez, 2006; Holden, 2006). Encourages a global movement of peoples that challenges territorial-based struc-tures and assumptions of welfare obligation and entitlement: Recent debate aboutmigration within an expanded EU has lead to restrictions on the welfare entitle-mentsofrecentmigrantsandtheemergenceoftheideaofatwo-tierwelfarestatedespitetheevidencethatEuropeanwelfarestatesmayneedmigrantlabour(JordanandDuvell,2003;Thomas,2005).Hereotherwisesociallyjustsocial democratic welfare states have been found wanting from the point of viewofthenewmigrant,whereasmoreliberalwelfarestatesarefoundtobemorereceptive to the welfare needs of migrants (albeit within a context of lower liberalwelfarestateentitlements).Theimpactofmigrationuponwelfareprovisionindevelopingcountriesisequallyprofound,bothintermsofthelossofskilledwelfare state labour (doctors and nurses) and in terms of reliance on foreign remit-tances. International care chains have emerged within this context (Ehrenreich andHochschild, 2002; Yeates, 2004). Thus migration challenges territorial borders ofsolidarities, and it will be argued that on the one hand it presages global solidari-tiesandglobalcitizenship,whileontheotherhanditreconstitutessolidaritiesaroundfamily,religionandethnicity.TheseissuesarepickedupinChapter5,where we discuss them in the context of global social movements.These are the broad ways in which it is argued that globalisation impacts upon socialpolicy as a subject area and as a practice of governments and allied actors. In termsof the five ways we defined the subject area of social policy earlier, we can thereforesuggest the following.In terms of social policy understood as sectoral policy (health, education, social pro-tection), two things stand out. One is the role of international organisations (Chapters 2,3 and 4) in influencing national social policy through loans or conditional aid or tech-nical assistance. We shall see that at present the world has in effect two global ministriesof health, two global ministries of education and two global ministries of social protec-tion. During the period of the creation and influence of the UN agencies in the 1950sand 1960s and into the 1970s, it was clear that global advice on sector policy came fromtheWHO,theUNESCOandILO.OncetheWorldBank,inthe1980sand1990s,10 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 10included social sector issues in its lending policy and practice, it began to operate in effectincompetitionwiththeUNsocialagencies.Itspolicyprescriptionsfordevelopingcountry health, education and social protection policy were often at odds with the advicegiven by UN agencies. Furthermore, it became better endowed than the UN agencies andhad more clout both in financial terms and in terms of the perceived quality of its pro-fessional staff. The other is the increased scope that the globalisation of markets offersprivate providers of hospitals, pension funds and aspects of education provision. Thewelfare mix between government provision and private provision is shifting in favour ofthe later in the context of globalisation.In terms of social policy understood as polices and processes of redistribution, reg-ulation and rights, a number of things stand out. The first is that because of the per-ceived impact of global economic competition on a countrys ability to tax in order tospend,theextenttowhichcountriesareabletoredistributehasbeenbroughtintoquestion.Similarly,becauseofafearofcapitalflight,acountrysabilitytoimposesocial regulations on business has been brought into question too. Guaranteeing socialrights becomes rather more difficult in this context. If it is true that to some extentcapital has escaped national rules by its capacity to move abroad, then the politicaltaskbecomesoneofreinventingthoserulesataregionalandgloballevel.Whatbecomes necessary if the global economy is to have a social purpose are global taxesand global social regulations geared to the realisation of a set of global social rights(Chapter 6).Intermsofsocialpolicyunderstoodasaconcernwithissuesofsocialjustice,citizenship rights, universality and diversity, agency of provision and caring responsi-bilities, a number of assertions can be made here which will be followed up in subse-quentchapters.Socialjusticequestionsinaglobaleratakeonaninternationaldimension.Howcanacontinuedconcernwithaddressingissuesofsocialjusticewithin one country (the traditional preoccupation of social policy analyst) be recon-ciled with a new concern to ensure social justice across borders? This has both philo-sophical and political dimensions. The Rawlsian conception of justice often used insocial policy literature applies to within-border issues of justice in a capitalist society.Here a degree of inequity is justified so long as the resulting impact upon economicgrowth raises the level of income of the poorest. Attempts have been made to refor-mulate this principle between states (ONeill, 1991; Pogge, 2002). A hugely contestedarea in globalisation studies is whether the existing form of neoliberal globalisation,while permitting inequity within and between countries, actually does raise the stan-dard of living of the worlds poor (Dollar and Kray, 2001; Milanovic, 2003). In polit-ical terms, the question becomes one of whether an alliance between the poor of theGlobalSouthcanbeforgedwiththebetter-offpooroftheGlobalNorththatimproves the lot of the former without unacceptably undermining the lot of the later.Thisbecomesexpressedconcretelyintheconflictsaroundgloballabourstandardsand other policy questions (Chapters 3, 4 and 5).Thinking about the concept of citizenship rights in a globalising world only servesto highlight the double-sidedness of the concept. On the one hand citizenship withinthe context of democratic developed capitalist societies is about securing rights andentitlements for all within a defined territorial space. On the other hand it is aboutexcluding from the benefits of citizenship those outside this entity. In the last years ofthe last century we have seen a simultaneous deepening and strengthening of citizen-shiprightsandentitlementswithinsomecountriesandatighteningofrestrictions11 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 11onmigrantsseekingaccesstothoseverysamecitizenshiprights.Overlayingthisdevelopmenthasbeentheemergenceofsupranationalcitizenshiprightswithinthemost advance world region, Europe, and at the same time within Europe a strength-ening of polices of exclusion towards the outsiders. These developments serve to callinto question a conception of citizenship based upon territory. Conceptualisations ofdualcitizenshiprightsformigrantworkersandevenglobalcitizenshipentitlementsfor all enter the discourse of social policy analysis and even the practice of interna-tional governance. These issues are explored fully in Chapter 6.Within one country the question of universalism and diversity for social policy ana-lysts and social policy-makers is often posed as how to facilitate the universal meetingofhumanneedsinwaysthatrespectculturaldiversity.Insofarasglobalisationhasincreased the pressures for and practices of cross-border migration, this only serves tomake this policy question more urgent within any one country. Questions of belongingand identity arise. Calls on the part of host countries for a more assertive commitmenttotheircountryofadoptionbynewmigrantsviewiththeincreasedpossibilitiesforretaining an identity of origin in a world of easy communication. At the same time, aswe shall see in Chapters 5 and 8, similar debates and policy choices arise at a globallevel. The UN did declare a set of universal human rights and evolved a convention ofeconomic,socialandculturalrights.However,theserightshavebeenquestionedbycountries influenced by fundamentalist religious values. Is it possible to sustain a uni-versal set of rights, including social rights that have purchase world-wide, in a globalorder where it is perceived by some in the Global South that such universal rights arepromulgated by very self-interested and hypocritical northern governments?Which agency should provide for the welfare needs of a population (state, market,civilsocietyorganisation,family)takesonanextradimensionofcomplexityinaninterconnected world, particularly in those countries now attempting to develop theirwelfare states in the context of a global economy. Gough and Woods (2004) capturethis particularly well in their exposition (summarised in the Table 1.2) of the ways inwhich all of these possible agencies now take on an international dimension. Not onlymight national governments be a welfare provider, but so might international organ-isations. Not only might national private companies provide private schools, but somight global education providers. Not only might local NGOs contribute to the wel-fare mix, but so might international NGOs such as Oxfam. Not only might care beprovidedbyacloserelative,butsomightsubstitutecarebemadepossiblebytheremittances sent back to families from abroad. This links to the final set of issues with which social policy scholars and makers areconcerned,thatofcaringobligationsandresponsibilities.Socialpolicyanalystshavedemonstratedthegenderandracialdivisionsofcaring(Williams,1989;Sainsbury,1996;DalyandRake,2003).Womencareformenandchildren.Blackpeopleserve12 Global Social Policy & GovernanceTable 1.2 The global welfare mixDomestic SupranationalState Domestic government International organisationsMarket Domestic market Global market, TNCsCommunity Domestic NGOs International NGOs Household Households International householdstrategiesSource: Gough and Woods, (2004: 30).Decon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 12whites. In general, women do more of the care for men and dependents when this careis provided in the home. Even in those countries where some aspects of care are institu-tionalised, women occupy the majority of the caring roles. Class and ethnic differencesbecome important in these cases, though. Black and minority migrant workers under-take a greater share of the lower-skilled caring jobs in public institutions. It is one of theargumentsofthisbookthatglobalisationwidensinquitecomplexwaysthegender,class and ethnic divisions of care while it at the same time may have facilitated a releasefrom family-based caring responsibilities for some women both in the richest countriesand the poorest. In the USA, for example, white middle-class women and men have theircaring duties undertaken by black or Hispanic migrant workers. But at the same time,the World Bank has accepted the idea that investing in the education of women is a goodway of speeding the demographic transition to smaller families and hence a reduced bur-den of care. However, economic globalisation has at the same time pulled women intosweatshops and into the international sex trade.In terms of social policys identification of a number of diverse worlds of welfare,globalisation poses the question as to whether it is likely to impel countries towardsany one of these models. Sykes et al. (2001) noted that while some scholars (Mishra,1999) had argued that neoliberal globalisation would drive countries to adopt liberalorresidualsocialpolices,otherssuggestedthatdevelopedcountrieswereimmunefromsuchglobaleconomicpressures.SykesconcludedthatforEurope,globaleco-nomic pressures did have some impact on a countrys social policy, but the nature ofthis impact was dependent upon the type of institutional welfare state already in exis-tence.Liberalwelfarestatesbecamemoreliberal.Socialdemocraticwelfaresstateswere,giventhepoliticalwill,largelysustainable.Conservativecorporatistwelfarestates were most challenged but also most resistant to change. I (Deacon, 1997, 2000a)have argued that, focusing on East European post-communist societies, the politics ofglobalisation rather than the economics of globalisation have shaped country think-ing about social policy, especially as these countries are open to the influence of theWorld Bank and other international actors. Kwon (2001) has demonstrated that in atleast one East Asian productivist welfare state the impact of globalisation has been tocompel it in the direction of more universal state provision. Taylor (2000) has alsoshown how some middle-income countries have increased public welfare spending inthe context of globalisation. However, it remains true that certainly for most middle-and lower-income countries the period of the Washington Consensus saw the destruc-tionoftheembryonicstatewelfareservicesofmuchofLatinAmerica,AfricaandSouth Asia in favour of targeted and residual policies.The final question that we suggested should be addressed was how might global-isationmodifytheexplanationsweofferforsocialpolicydevelopmentandwhatitdoes to class, gender and ethnic welfare struggles? The answers to this question aredeferred until we consider a prior question addressed below. Studying and understanding socialpolicy in a global contextSocial policy as scholarly activity has drawn on political economy, the sociology ofclass, gender and ethnicity, and institutional political science to develop fairly robust13 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 13theories for explaining welfare state development and welfare state diversity. Do thesetheories need to be modified to account for (a) national social policy change in thecontext of globalisation, and (b) can these theories can be adapted to offer plausibleaccounts of the emergence and character of a supranational or global social policy?We need to take an excursion into other fields of scholarly endeavour to determinewhich is of use to us.The account used in this book to offer explanations of the ways national socialpolicy changes in the context of globalisation and the way in which a supranationalglobal social policy has emerged draws upon insights from development studies, inter-national relations and international organisation theory, policy transfer and diffusionliterature, global social movement studies, concepts of hegemonic struggle as well assome new work around the ethnography of global policy. Within this complex intel-lectual framework certain conceptualisations will emerge as being of particular use.Among these are the concepts of welfare regime theory (as distinct from welfare stateregime theory) (Gough and Woods, 2004), complex multi-lateralism (OBrien et al.,2000), global policy advocacy coalitions (Orenstein, 2004, 2005) global knowledgenetworks (Stone and Maxwell, 2005) and the politics of scale (Clarke, 2004b, 2005;Gould, 2005; Stubbs, 2005).Development studies literature has not until recently used the language of socialpolicy (Hall and Midgely, 2004; Dani, 2005). It has been concerned either with thebroader concept of development that includes and necessarily privileges the economicunderpinnings of development or, especially in an African context, with overseas aidpolicyandinterventionsinparticularsectorslikepovertyalleviation,reproductivehealth care and basic education. Gough and Woods (2004: 32) have, however, pro-vided an admirable basis upon which to sustain a dialogue between the concerns ofsocial policy analysts and those of the development studies specialist. They argue anddemonstrate that the welfare regime theory of Esping-Andersen (1990) and those whofollowed him should be renamed welfare-state regime theory, applying as it does atbest to developed OECD countries. The countries of the world as a whole fall, accord-ing to Gough and Woods (2004), into three meta-welfare regimes. These are the wel-fare state regimes of the OECD world, informal security regimes within which peasanteconomies co-exist with peripheral capitalism and within which there is a less distinctpolicy mode, and insecurity regimes within which predatory capitalism operates in thecontext of more or less collapsed states.Crucial from the point of view of an argument in this book is the way in whichthe social policy regimes of some particular countries are described in the Gough andWoods (2004) volume as hybrid-sharing characteristics of welfare state regimes andinformalsecurityregimes.ThusBarrientos(2004)suggeststhatLatinAmericaasawhole might have been best characterised before the neoliberal reforms of the 1990sasconservative-informalregimesbecausethesmallformalsectorsoftheeconomyoperated with work-based, wage-related welfare entitlements imported from Europe.After the reforms, many countries gave way to market-based private provision with aresidual safety net for the poor. This regime is then characterised as a liberal-informalregime. It will be argued in the next chapter that the World Bank and other globalactorswereabletopushforthesereformsandunderminethepartialconservativewelfare states of much of Latin America. They could do this because, whereas in thecontext of Europe a conservative welfare state represented a form of more or less uni-versalwelfarestateentitlementservingthecauseofequityandsocialjustice,inthecontext of Latin America, where only a small sector of the economy and population14 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 14wereservedbythiskindofsocialpolicy,itservedpreciselytheoppositeends,privileging some and excluding the majority. A similar account could be given of theprematureorpartialstatewelfarepoliciesofmuchofpost-colonialAfricaandSouth Asia. Here new elites attempted to conserve and develop, often in impoverishedcircumstances, the urban hospital and the urban university as well as the civil servicepension fund bequeathed by colonialists. To attack these bastions of privilege in thename of the rural poor was an easy populist thing for the World Bank and other exter-nal actors to do. As we shall see, the problem was that in the name of criticising theseenclavewelfareregimes,theveryideaofuniversalstatewelfareprovisionwasrub-bished and lost for two decades in development studies discourse and practice. Political scientists writing about international relations in the context of globali-sationaredividedintheiranalysisbetweenthetwoextremesofrealistsandcos-mopolitan democrats. For realists still live in a world of sovereign states; they use theprincipalagenttheorytoshowhowinternationalorganisationpoliciesarenothingbut the products of inter-state bargaining. For cosmopolitan democrats, the manage-ment of the world is transforming in the direction of a system of global governance,withanemergingsystemofglobalregulationsthatareinfluencedbyotherglobalprocess and actors (Held et al., 1999). Between the extremes of the state-centric real-ists and the cosmopolitan dreamers, most international relations theorists give muchattention to the ways in which a large number of non-state and often private actorshave entered the space we shall call the contested terrain of emerging global gover-nance. Josselin and Wallace (2001) include transnational corporations, global knowl-edge elites or networks, organised criminal syndicates, the Catholic Church and globalIslamic movements, international trade unions and private armies in their review. Tothese should be added International Non-Governmental Organisations (INGOs). It isnot just that these actors enter the global political space and argue, but they also takeoninaprivatecapacityinternationalregulatoryactivitynotyetundertakenbytheunderdeveloped system of formal global governance. Thus firms evolve private inter-national regimes of self-regulation in many spheres (Hall and Biersteker, 2002). Globalor at least transnational social movements from below have become a major force inthe global politics of globalisation (Porta et al., 1999; Kaldor, 2003; Scholte, 2005).Issues like world poverty, global taxation, international labour standards, and accessto pharmaceuticals in poorer countries can no longer be discussed at meetings of theG8 or the WTO without there being a major presence on the streets of internationalcampaigning groups on all of these issues. The World Social Forum (WSF) attemptsto provide a global organising space for these activities to match the organising spaceprovided to international business by the World Economic Forum (WEF).Onestudythatfocuseduponthewaysinwhichglobalsocialmovementsinter-acted with and influenced the policies of multilateral economic institutions (OBreinetal.,2000)isparticularlyinstructive.ItsexaminationoftherelationsbetweentheWorldBankandthewomensmovement,theWTOandlabour,theWorldBank,WTO and the environmental social movement drew important conclusions: Our study has stressed the link between forms of international institution and socialmovementsinwhichthestateisjustoneareaofcontactandstruggle(albeitanimportant one). The MEIGSM relationship can be direct and need not be mediatedby the state. Social forces with and across state borders are a factor in determiningthe nature of international order and organisation. (P. 234)15 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 15These authors coin the term complex multi-lateralism to capture this reality withinwhich the realists concern with statestate interaction sits side by side with a new setoftrans-nationalpowerdynamicswithinwhichinternationalorganisationsandthesocial movements they are confronted by have a degree of policy autonomy at a globallevel.Itisthisframeworkthatwewillfindparticularlyusefulinexplainingsomeaspects of the ways international organisations influence state social policy, but alsoGSMs influence international organisation social policy.This conclusion that there might be a terrain of contestation about global socialpolicyandthatnotonlystatesbutalsointernationalorganisationsandGSMsareactors in it will be returned to time and time again. For now it is useful to note howthisviewleadsustochallengeanotherwiseimportantrecentcontributiontotheliterature at the interface of development studies and international relations. Boas andMcNeillsstudyofthepoliciesofseveralinternationalorganisationsincludingtheWorld Bank, the WTO and the OECD, concludes rather pessimistically that:Powerful states (notably the USA), powerful organisations (such as the IMF) and evenpowerful disciplines (economics) exercise their power largely by framing: which servesto limit the power of potentially radical ideas to achieve change. (2004: 1)While there is truth in this, it will be suggested in the course of this text that a morenuancedandmoreaccurateconclusionmightbethatpowerfulstates(notablytheUSA), powerful organisations (such as the IMF) and even powerful disciplines (eco-nomics)contendwithotherpowerfulstates(notablytheEU,China,Brazil),otherpowerfulorganisations(suchastheILO)andotherdisciplines(suchassocialandpoliticalscience)toengageinawarofpositionregardingthecontentofglobalpolicy. This alternative conclusion echoes John Clarkes recent attempt to capture thesense in which we live in and against a neoliberal global order:theworkofconstructinganeo-liberalhegemonyisintensive,deploysdifferentstrategies,andencountersblockagesandrefusals. Ithastoengageotherpolitical-culturalprojectsattemptingtosubordinate,accommodate,incorporateordisplacethem. To obscure such intense political-cultural work confirms the neo-liberal illusionof inevitability. If, on the contrary, we draw attention to the grinding and uneven strug-gletomaketheworldconformandrecognizethelimitationsandfailuresofthisproject questions of conflict, contestation, and the unfinished become rather moresignificant. Livinginaneo-liberalworldisnotnecessarilythesameasbeingneo-liberal. Attention to the different sorts of living with, in and against neo-liberal domina-tion is a necessary antidote to big picture projections of its universalism. (2004b: 102)Thisbridgesnicelytotheconceptofglobalpolicyadvocacycoalitions usedbyOrenstein(2004,2005)toanalysethedevelopmentandworld-widesellingoftheglobalpensionpolicypreferredbytheWorldBanksince1990.Thedetailsofthisstory will be told in the next chapter. What is important here is the identification ofprivate and formal international actors (such as those we listed earlier) and an accountof the ways in which global policy is first put on the agenda and then campaigned for.Earlier work on the role of epistemic communities noted that:How decision makers define state interests and formulate policies to deal with complexand technical issues can be a function of the manner in which the issues are representedbyspecialiststowhomtheyturnforadviceinthefaceofuncertaintyepistemic16 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 16communities(networksofknowledgebasedexperts)playapartinhelpingstatesidentifytheirinterests,formingtheissuesforcollectivedebate,proposingspecificpolices, and identifying salient points for negotiation. (Haas, 1992: 3)Thesamecanbesaidofthewaysinwhichinternationalnetworksofknowledge-based experts play a part in helping international organisations shape the issues forcollective debate. Indeed, since 1992 the world has witnessed a proliferation of kindsofinternationalknowledge-basedexpertsorknowledgenetworks(KNETS)(StoneandMaxwell,2005).Whetherunderstoodasepistemiccommunitieswhoshareacodified form of scientific knowledege about an issue (such as pensions), or as dis-coursecoalitionsandcommunitieswhousesymbolslanguageandnarrativeasasourceofpower,orasembeddedknowledgenetworkswhopossessauthoritybecause of their track record for problem solving, KNETS are now an integral part ofthe emerging forms of global governance. As Stone, modifying Held, puts it, KNETSdonotsimplycrystallizearounddifferentsitesandformsofpower(Held,2000:19),thenetworkisasiteandformofpower(2005:100).Inaglobalisedworlddevoid of any effective global democratic processes, these KNETS substitute for otherforms of policy making. Stone notes that:Globalorregionalnetworksarenotsubjecttotheusualreportingandaccount-ability requirements of public bodies in liberal democracies. The public even the wellinformed and politically literate of OECD countries are still largely unaware of theroles,reachandinfluenceofglobalnetworksCombinedwiththetechnocraticcharacter of many such networks, the public is excluded and political responsibility isundermined. (2005: 103)In the case of the global pension policy story told by Orenstein (2005) the agenda set-ting was very much in the hands of a global knowlege network based upon econo-mists schooled in the Chicago school of neo-liberal economics. This network had aglobal reach in terms of its links to Milton Friedman, Friedrich von Hayek and oth-ers (Valdes, 1995). It then became centred upon work in the World Bank initiated byLarry Summers, the then chief economist, which was eventually published in 1994 asAverting the Old Age Crisis. A transnational advocacy coalition was then developedtofurthertheadoptionofthesereforms.ThiscoalitionincludedtheWorldBank,USAID,theInter-AmericanDevelopmentBank(IDB)andotheractors(Orenstein,2005: 193).Thisworkininternationalrelationsonhowglobalpolicybecomesshapedbyknowledge networks and then argued for by global advocacy coalitions is somewhatdifferentinemphasisfromotherscholarlyworkbaseduponworldsocietytheory.Adopting a more sociological approach to the subject, Meyer et al. (1997) argue thatglobalsocietyrestsonandreinforcesuniversalisticdefinitionswithwhichsciencegains more authority. They argues that many features of the nation state derive fromworld-wide models constructed and propogated through global cultural and associa-tionalprocesses.Theapproachwithinworldsocietytheoryistostartnotfromthenationstateasabasisforsociologicalanalysis,butratherfromanalreadyexistingglobal society that transcends borders. Cross-border professional associations act tospead policy ideas and practices wherever there are members. Education policy andpractice,healthcareproceduresandpracticesbecomethesameeverywhereincon-formity with professional standards. While clearly this has some explanantory value17 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 17with regard to how policies in one country become transposed to another country, itlacks a sense of contest and conflict about policy options. It has echoes of functional-istsociologyoftheTalcottParsonstheory,wherebyeverysocialphenomenonisunderstood as serving a higher societal function. Conflicts of interest and conflicts ofpoliciesaremissing.Aglanceatthepolicytransferandpolicydiffussionliterature(Dolowitz and Marsh, 1996) reveals accounts of policy transfers across borders whereitisclearthatchoicesarebeingmadebysomecountriestoborrowthepolicyofanother, either because it is being coerced into doing so by powerful global actors orbecause it is in conformity with its particular ideological goals, or better fits to sets ofnationalculturalassumptions.Inotherwords,nationalsocialpolicychoicesreflectglobalised policy options and contestations about these.Finally, in this review of aspects of the literature which might inform our under-standing of how global social policy is made and implemented, we turn to the politicsof scale. This is referring to the idea that it is not adequate to attempt to capture thecomplexity of policy-making in a globalised world by thinking in terms only of layersofgovernmentorgovernance.Anaccountofpolicy-makingwhichtalkedonlyinterms of the taken-for-granted levels of sub-national, national, regional and global isseen as lacking an important aspect of policy-making in a globalised world. What isimportant here is that policy-making is not only taking place at different taken-for-granted levels of governance, but that key policy players are transcending each levelatanyonemoment.Thepolicy-makingprocessismulti-sitedandmulti-layeredaswell as multi-actored, all at one time. Within this context also, individuals as changeagents and policy translators can act in the spaces between levels and organisations(Stubbs, 2006). The World Bank is in Tanzania. Care international, a mega-INGO, isin Tanzania. The consultation process between the Bank and the Tanzanian civil soci-ety about social policy involves local NGOs informed by international consultants. Tounderstandsomethingofthecomplexityofsocialpolicy-makingfor Tanzania,oneneeds to examine actors and activities at the Bank, in the government, in INGOs, ininternational consulting companies and in donor government international develop-ment sections. The global is in the local, and the local in the global captures a littleofthispoliticsofscale.Withinthiscontextthenationalpolicy-makingprocesscanbecome distorted, so that those who are better able to travel between these scales arebetter able to influence policy. Indeed, Gould has argued that transnational privateagencies [find] themselves brokering and, to some extent, supplanting local civil soci-ety representation in policy consultation (2005: 142).This process opens up the possibilities for individuals and individual companies tooperatewearingshiftingidentities.Inthissense,theinsightsprovidedbyJanineWedel, based on her case study of American aid to Russia in the early 1990s, offers anumber of highly pertinent middle-range concepts in order to study these processes.Whilesheprefersthemetaphorofaidasatransmissionbelt,herfocusisontheinterface between donors and the recipients in terms of what happens when differ-ingsystemsinteract(Wedel,2004:1545).Sheaddressestheimportance,intheseencounters, of multiplex networks (2004: 165), where players know each other, andinteract,inavarietyofcapacities,withmultipleidentities(whichshetermstrans-identities), and in a variety of roles. Her tale is one of shifting and multiple agency,promoted in part by what she terms flex organisations, which have a chameleon-like, multipurpose character, with actors within them able to play the boundariesbetween national and international; public and private; formal and informal; market18 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 18andbureaucratic;stateandnon-state;evenlegalandillegal(2004:167).*Attheextreme,thisleadstothepossibilityofindividualsplayingalargeroleinglobalpolicy-making.JeffreySachs,avillainofthepieceintheWedelstoryofRussianprivatisation,becomesreincarnatedastheauthorofthereportoftheWHOsCommission on Macro-Economics and Health, and subsequently head of the UN taskforce on the MDGs project (see Chapter 4).This review of the wider development studies and international relations literaturehas argued that certain concepts and approaches from them are of value in trying tomakesenseofglobalsocialpolicy.Theseincludewelfareregimetheory,complexmulti-lateralism,globalpolicyadvocacycoalitions,globalknowledgenetworksandthe politics of scale. The later approach in particular enables us to understand globalsocialpolicy-makingasmulti-sitedandmulti-actored.However,thisemphasisonindividual actors as change agents and policy advocacy coalitions has led us a longway from the political economy or class-struggle basis of explanations of welfare statedevelopment within one country which we examined earlier. In the light of the fore-going, can we find any way of scaling up the explanations we offered earlier of wel-farestatechangewithinonecountryusingnotionsofclass,genderandethnicstruggles, mobilisations and discourse to account for elements of the making of globalsocial policy?Returningthentothefinalquestionthatweleftunansweredinthesectiononglobalisations impact upon social policy, how might globalisation modify the expla-nations we offer for social policy development? Obviously we have to factor in thenew international actors and hence the new multi-actored and multi-located policy-makingprocessesthatwehavealreadyidentified.Butwhatofthebroadanalyticalframeworks bequeathed to us by comparative social policy analysis? First, in terms ofthe moral reform approach to social policy change, a case could be mounted that insofarastherehasbeenashiftwithinthelastdecadesfromafundamentalistneo-liberalism to something which is concerned to attend to the worst social consequencesof economic globalisation, this might be explained in part by a growth in a moral con-cern for the poor of the developing world. It is certainly true that religious organisa-tionshavebeenattheforefrontofglobalcampaignsfordebtreliefandpovertyalleviation. Equally, the logic of industrialisation thesis might be invoked to explainsomeaspectsofsocialpolicyshiftsinthecontextofanindustrialisingdevelopingworld. Certainly politics still matter, as reflected in the contest of ideas about welfarebetween and within international organisations such as the World Bank and the ILO. However,aswearguedinthesectionontheoriesofwelfarestatedevelopment,this contest of ideas about global and national social policy needs to be understood inpartasaproductofmaterialstugglesbetweensocialclassesandgenderandethnicgroups. Class struggles can and do take on cross-border dimensions; the social move-ments of women have become globalised; within-ethnicity forms of organisation havetaken on an international dimension too. It is one of the contentions of this book thatthe analytical framework provided by Williams (1989) of a racially structured, patri-achal capitalism, which was used by Ginsburg (1992, 2004) to understand why thesocialpoliciesofGermany,Sweden,theUSAandtheUKweresodifferent,canbeadaptedtocontributetoourunderstandingbothofnationalsocialpolicywithinaglobal context and of emerging global social policy. 19 International and Global Dimensions of Social Policy* I am indebted to Paul Stubbs for this summary; it is to be found in Stubbs (2005).Decon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 19In terms of national social policy in a global context, it is generally agreed that oneconsequence of the neo-liberal globalisation project has been to strengthen the powerof capital over that of labour. Capital is free to move across borders, labour is morerestricted.Constructingcross-bordertradeunionsolidaritiesindefenceofnationalwelfare provision is not easy. As a consequence, the share of income going to profitsrather than wages has increased (Wade, 2004). This is not to say that there has beena full-blown undermining of national welfare state provision in developed countriesasaconsequenceoftradeunionweakening.Thishashappened,butonlyinsomeplaces (for example, Germany) in small measure. In other middle-income countries, incontrast, an increased presence of trade unionism has led to universal welfare gains(for example, South Korea).Anysummaryassessmentoftheimpactofglobalisationuponthecapacityofwomen to organise within countries to defend their gendered welfare interests mustbemorenuanced.Whilewomenasworkers mayhavesufferedsomeofthesameeffects of globalisation upon their capacity to defend and improve pay and workingconditions, organisations of women as women have been strengthened by globalisa-tions easing of transnational networking. As we shall see in Chapter 5, UN confer-encessuchastheFourthWorldConferenceonWomeninBeijingfacilitatedthegrowth of a global womens movement that empowered women in many developingcountries in particular to confront issues of patriachry and women-unfriendly devel-opmentpoliciesforthefirsttime.Sincethentherehasbeenmuchtocelebrateinprogress towards gender equality (UNRISD, 2005).Intermsofwithin-ethnicityformsoforganisation,thestoryislesswelldocu-mented.Thereissomesuggestionthatwhileneoliberalglobalisationisspreadingaglobal western culture, at the same time local and ethnic identities have become moreimportant. Cross-border movements of people may have led in part, paradoxically, toanincreasedidentificationwithandnetworkingwithonescountryoforigin.Post-war diasporas have become an important factor in the policy-making of some coun-tries.Reactioninsomedevelopedwelfarestateshasbeentorestrictwelfarebenefitaccess to new migrants. On the other hand, it has been suggested (Chau, 2004) thatglobalisations push towards markets and democracy everywhere has has the effect ofstimulating oppressed ethnic majorities to wrest power and resources from hithertomarket-dominatingethnicminorities(forexample,IndonesiansagainstChinese).Globalisation has therefore increased the importance of inter-ethnic stuggles in shap-ing national social policy.How can the framework of capitalism, patriarchy and a racially structured impe-rialism with its concomitant global social divisions of class, gender and ethnicity andassociatedstrugglesoverwork,familyandnationbeappliedtotheshapingofasupranationalglobalsocialpolicy?Howarethenewglobalactorsthathavebeenidentified as playing a role in shaping global social policy influenced by these globalconflicts of interest? Who is winning at the global level? Capital or labour? Patriarchyorwomen?Whitesorpeopleofcolour?Inwhatwaysdoglobalsocialpoliciesembody these clashes of interest? Figure 1.1 attempts to capture schematically howthe analytical framework might be transposed onto the global playing field.First, in terms of class struggle this has a global dimension. At one level the entirerange of international organisations, the policies they formulate and the intellectualsworking within and around them might be understood, according to Sklair (2002: 99)orSoederberg(2006),asthefractionoftheglobalcapitalistclass,theglobalised20 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 20professional seeking to legitimate and shore up a globalised capitalism to prevent itbecomingaglobalisedsocialism.Forme,ontheotherhand,whatisimportantiswhethertheglobalisedprofessionalsareformulatingaglobalneoliberalsocialpolicyorsomethingwhichwemightrecogniseasaglobalsocial-democraticsocialpolicy, so that the global economy serves a global social purpose. In this context, then,IinterpretthecontestbetweenthemoreneoliberalideasandpoliciesoftheWorldBank and the more social democratic policies of the ILO as one reflection of a globalclass struggle. As we will see in Chapter 5, global business is well positioned to influ-enceglobalpolicy,andglobaltradeunionismratherlessso(Farnsworth,2005).Moves to bring global business into partnership with the UN through such devices astheGlobalCompact(Chapter4)arevariouslyinterpetedastheUNsellingoutto21 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyClass (a) Framework CapitalismPatriarchyImperialismGenderEthnicityWork(who gets it)Nation(who belongs)(d) Global processIMFWorld BankOECD, WTOInternational businessILOOther UN agenciesInternational trade unionsClass struggleFundamentalisms(Christian, Islamic)VaticanG8IMFEU(b) Struggles (c) IssuesFamily(womens role)Gender conflictsEthnic conflictsUNInternational womens movementUNG77These conflicts are reflected in the disputes between UN Human rightsconvertions on the one hand and fundamentalist or ethnic/national responses ofsome countries and actors, and broadly speaking between the white G8 and theblack South (G77).Figure 1.1 Global conflicts of interest and global social policyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 21global business or as a means of imposing a global social responsibility upon business.Equally important in terms of the impact of globalisation upon the relative balance ofclass forces at the transnational level, is the ways in which global interconnectednessappears to be detaching the middle class of developing countries from a focus uponthe national state-building or developmental project into a searching after their owninterests within a global marketplace (Cohen, 2004; Gould, 2005).Intermsoftheglobalgenderstruggle,wehavealreadyreferredtothewaysinwhichsomepartsoftheUNsystemhaveenabledaglobalwomensmovementtoorganise and influence across borders. The UN declarations of human rights does givespace to gender equity and rights issues. The contest here is not so much between thewomen-friendly policies of many of the UN social agencies and the patriarchial senti-ments and policies of the World Bank or WTO, but rather that there is still contesta-tionaboutthesepolicieswithintheUNdebatingandpolicy-makingchambers.Anumber of governments, noteably the USA and some Islamic countries, and also theVatican (which has state status at the UN), are now questioning some of the previ-ouslytaken-for-grantedassumptionsaboutthedesirabilityofthesewomen-friendlypolicies. Within the World Bank, however, as Sen (2004, 2006) has shown, the argu-mentsaboutthepositivedevelopmentaleffectsofputtingwomenatthecentreofdevelopment by, for example, ensuring equal opportunity for girl education and bymicro-credit for women, are now accepted as mainstream.The question of ethnicity and struggles on the part of the largely non-white GlobalSouth to undo the huge global inequities left over from the imperial epoch within whichthe whites were the beneficiaries lies at the heart of the battle for global economic andsocial policies. Whether and how the global division of labour laid down in the periodofempirescanbealtered,whetherandhowtherecanberestitutionforpast(andindeed continuing) exploitation of the South by the North, whether and how the debtsincurred by the South to the North can be written off, whether and how a systematicpolicy of global transfers of resources from the Global North to the Global South tofundeducationhealthandsocialprotectionmightbemadetowork,arethe crunchissues. Here the World Bank and the IMF are clearly owned by and still acting for theGlobal North. The UN and WTO (which does have a majority membership from theSouth)areforumsforthecontinuingplayingoutoftheseissues.Inthepasttwodecades the Global South has found a new voice and strength in these meeting places.Almost every global social policy issue becomes one of heated controversy between theEU block, the USA and the G77 or some alliance of the developing countries such asthe new G20(s) led by Brazil, China and South Africa. At issue are such matters as theprice of essential drugs and the funding of primary education. Class, gender and ethnic conflicts cut across each other within one country. So itis in the global arena. Indeed, it will be argued in this book that there is now a majorfaultlineintheglobaldiscourseaboutdesirablenationalandglobaleconomicandsocial policies between, on the one hand, a northern-centred debate between a USA-influenced desire for global neoliberal policies and a European-influenced desire forglobalsocialdemocraticpolicies,andontheotherhandasouthern-centreddebateabout getting out from under any northern-imposed agenda for global economic andsocialpolicy.Theintellectualstruggleengagedinbynorthernsocialreformistsinthe global arena is cut across by the intellectual struggle engaged in by southern de-globalisers. Finding a way out of this impasse is one of the key challenges for those ofus who are keen to work for a more socially just world with more socially just global22 Global Social Policy & GovernanceDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 22social policies. This is the subject of this book, but in particular the issue which willbe returned to in the last chapter.Further ReadingOnglobalisation:Scholte,J.(2005)Globalization:ACriticalIntroduction.Basingstoke:Palgrave,and Held, D. and McGrew, A. (2002) Globalization/Anti-Globalization. Cambridge: Polity.On globalisation and social policy: Yeates, N. (2001) Globalization and Social Policy. London: Sage.On globalisation and welfare states: Glatzer, M. and Rueschemeyer, D. (2005) Globalization and theFuture of the Welfare State. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Onsocialpolicyinadevelopmentcontext:Mkandawire,T.(ed.)(2004)SocialPolicyinaDevelopment Context. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Oncomparativesocialpolicy:Kennet,P.(2004)AHandbookofComparativeSocialPolicy.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Global Social Policy journal.Related Websiteswww.gaspp.orgwww.globalwelfare.net23 International and Global Dimensions of Social PolicyDecon-3507-Ch-01.qxd3/6/20074:43 PMPage 232The Social Policy of the World BankThis chapter Provides an introduction to and brief overview of the role of international organisations ininfluencing national social policy Describes the World Bank's social policy advice to countries under five headings: povertyalleviation, pension policy, social development policy, and provision of health and educa-tion servicesOverview of Chapters 2, 3 and 4International organisations influence national policy through a variety of channels: research, agenda setting and the development of knowledge frameworks; policy-based lending and project conditionality; and establishing global codes, rules and norms.Thepurposeofthisandthenexttwochaptersistoexaminecriticallythesocialpolicy advice given to countries by the World Bank, IMF, OECD,UN, ILO, WHOand other international organisations. Here these organisations are regarded partlyas depositories of principles and norms which confer on their secretariats a degreeofpoliticalautonomy.Theyareinvolvedintheirownrightontheinternationalstage. That is not to say that the policies of these organisations are not derived inpart from major state interests. Often the hegemonic state plays a dominant role inshapingthepoliciesofinternationalorganisations(BoasandMcNeill,2004).Atissue, therefore, is whether the social policy advice of the international organisationsreflects a more universalistic or social democratic approach, or a more residual andselective liberal approach to social policy. Have we seen a global consensus appear-ingwithinandbetweeninternationalorganisationsthatisstronglyinfluencingDecon-3507-Ch-02.qxd2/23/200711:27 AMPage 2425 The Social Policy of the World Bankcountries in an era of globalisation towards one or other welfare model, or is the storyrather one of contestation and dispute?The World Bank, IMF and UN agencies have a long history of claiming to helpcountries at a lower level of economic development to better meet the welfare needsof their populations. This advice by the Bank and IMF has in many cases been linkedtowhatcametobeknowninthe1980sandearly1990sasstructuraladjustment,whereby the countries were made, as a condition attached to loans, to cut what wasregarded as excessive public spending to balance their books and enable the develop-ment of their private economies, often through a stra