The European Union and the Social Dimension of Globalization

How the EU Influences the World

Jan Orbie, Lisa Tortell

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2009
• Print ISBN: 9780415663984
• eBook ISBN: 9781134035526
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Globalisation
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This volume provides a comprehensive account of the European Union's social role in the world, assessing the EU's ability to shape the social aspect of globalization from both law and political science perspectives.

Focusing explicitly on the EU, the authors address the extent of coherence between the Union's international social objectives compared with the activities of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and with other EU foreign policy goals. Various dimensions of Europe's global social role are addressed, including:

• the social dimension of EU trade relations
• the involvement of civil society in EU development policies
• the linkage between the EU's internal and external 'social model'
• the export of Europe's social acquis through enlargement and neighbourhood policies
• the EU's international position on health, gender equality, children's rights, and corporate social responsibility
• the role of the Union in the ILO

The European Union and the Social Dimension of Globalization will be of strong interest to students and researchers in EU studies, Globalization studies, and Social Policy.

1 From the social clause to the social dimension of globalization

Jan Orbie and Lisa Tortell

We aim at shaping globalization in the interests of all our citizens, based on our common values and principles.

European Council (2007)

The European Union (EU)¹ clearly aspires to play an active role in harnessing globalization in line with its interests and values as the quote above illustrates. The European Council Declaration on Globalization emphasizes the importance of multilateral co-operation in international domains such as climate change and energy, financial markets, trade relations, sustainable development, and global security and migration. It concludes that globalization is ‘a source of opportunity rather than a threat’, and that ‘we will continue building a stronger Union for a better world’.

This book examines the EU’s ability in shaping the social aspect of globalization. In particular, it focuses on the promotion of labour standards internationally, although broader external policy objectives such as development, democracy and human rights are also addressed. In various policy documents, the Union has committed itself to promoting the social dimension of globalization.² It is argued that the EU could export several elements of the European social model, which ensures that social and economic aims go hand in hand, to the world scene. In this respect, the harmonious relationship between the activities of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the EU are emphasized (European Commission and ILO 2004).

In this introductory chapter, we will define the subject matter and situate it within the existing literature on European external relations. We will explain why this research project mainly focuses on the international promotion of labour standards by the EU. An outline of the EU’s role in relation to the social dimension of globalization will be given, arguing that Europe has shifted from a rather narrow approach of promoting core labour standards through trade policies to a broader and more ambitious international social agenda. The question of whether the Union has been successful in this respect is addressed in the different contributions to this volume. More specifically, we will evaluate the enhanced co-operation between the EU and the ILO (multilateral coherence) and the potential tension between external social and other objectives (horizontal coherence). Based on these findings, the concluding section makes a preliminary assessment of the EU’s role as a normative power in advancing the social dimension of globalization.

Europe’s global social role

This book is about the EU’s social role in the world, considering EU policies aiming to promote social objectives globally. It concerns, therefore, the social dimension of Europe’s international policies and not the impact of globalization on the EU itself.³ The contributions to this book address various dimensions of Europe’s social role in the world, such as the international promotion of children’s rights by the EU, gender equality in EU external policies, the involvement of civil society in EU development policies, the EU’s international position on corporate social responsibility, the social dimension of European Union trade relations, Europe’s international health policies, the export of Europe’s social acquis through enlargement and neighbourhood policies, the role of the Union in the ILO and the linkage between the EU’s internal and external ‘social model’.

Towards a definition

The EU has repeatedly declared its commitment to promote the social dimension of globalization, but a precise definition of the term is not obvious. Defining the scope and nature of the ‘social dimension’ of EU external policies is difficult for two main reasons. First, ‘global social policy’ is not a circumscribed external policy domain in EU treaties and institutional architecture, as is the case with EU external trade, development or foreign and security policy. To the extent that there is an EU social policy, it largely concerns an intra-EU policy domain where many social issues fall under member state rather than EC competences.⁴ Second, ‘international social goals’ are basically horizontal foreign policy objectives, and are thus (potentially) pursued through a number of EU external policy instruments. In any event, it is difficult to define the content of ‘social’, which is often vaguely and broadly defined to encompass a whole range of normative foreign policy objectives such as redistributive policies, development relations, human rights, democracy promotion, good governance or non-economic policies in general.

If ‘social’ is difficult to define, is the ‘social dimension of globalization’ any easier? ‘Globalization’ itself is a complex and evocative concept with a myriad of meanings, commonly understood as encompassing the liberalization of international trade, the expansion of foreign direct investment and the emergence of cross-border financial flows.⁵ The term usually refers to economics, but also includes cultural, political and social aspects. Attempting to define the social side of globalization is an even more fluid process.

Focusing on labour rights

It is reasonable, in searching for a definition, to turn to the report of the ILO World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization (WCSDG). The Commission was established by the ILO in February 2002 as an independent body and released its report in 2004 (WCSDG 2004).⁶ The WCSDG is best understood as part of an evolution in ILO programmes and activities that can be traced to the 1995 Copenhagen World Summit for Social Development, and includes most notably the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Rights and Principles at Work, 1998 and the 1999 decent work agenda.⁷

The Copenhagen Summit was the first intergovernmental meeting on human and social development, putting ‘the needs, rights and aspirations of people at the centre’ of decisions and actions.⁸ The Summit was convened out of concern at globalization, and the resulting Declaration and Programme of Action included a focus on four fundamental labour standards and brought the role of the ILO to centre stage.⁹ The commitment to fundamental labour standards was a ‘key element’ of the Summit’s Declaration (Charnovitz 2000:151) and, together with developments in the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1996,¹⁰ provided the impetus for the ILO’s 1998 Declaration (Charnovitz 2000:151–63; ILO 2002:3).

The Declaration places an emphasis on the priority set of core labour standards (CLS) abstracted from the Conventions, as first set out in the Copenhagen Summit (see Table 1.1 for the fundamental principles and corresponding conventions). Members are considered to be bound by these principles regardless of their ratification record. In 1999, the ILO introduced its decent work initiative: the vision of Juan Somavia, the new Director General (DG) of the ILO, was to develop a ‘set of objectives that can be explained to the public’ (Charnovitz 2000:163). CLS and the decent work agenda have now become, to some extent, shorthand ways of describing the ILO’s work, and are integral to the way in which the ILO’s work has become central to the debate about the social dimension of globalization internationally.

The WCSDG itself bypassed the difficulties in defining the social dimension of globalization and considered it in its widest sense, as being about more than jobs, health and education and involving people’s ‘aspirations for democratic participation and material prosperity’ (WCSDG 2004: vii). There is a need to integrate social considerations into programmes and strategies for economic development in order to limit the potential negative social results of economic globalization and to ensure that the undoubted benefits are evenly distributed. In its widest sense, therefore, the social dimension of globalization concerns the effects on people and societies of the globalization of economic systems internationally.

This book takes the work of the WCSDG as a starting point, but largely focuses on the issue of labour for a number of reasons. First of all, work and labour standards are perhaps the core of social policy. They are the obvious starting point for a definition of ‘social’ in everyday life: the concern with rights at work, the nature of work and the ability to earn a sufficient amount to ensure a ‘sustainable livelihood’¹¹ is crucial to individuals’ aspirations for themselves and their families. Work and employment are inevitably affected by the economic and social impacts of globalization on regions, countries and individuals.

Second, and most importantly, the ILO is clearly the key international institution working on the social dimension of globalization, with the work of the WCSDG defining the topic. The WCSDG’s expectation that the attainment of decent work and CLS (see Table 1.1) would ensure the equal distribution of the benefits of globalization has become a defining feature of modern ILO work. The ILO’s influence has been great, in turn, on the approach to the social dimension of globalization debate taken by international institutions, so much so that the ILO’s decent work agenda and CLS have been accepted as integral components of the global governance of the issue.¹²

This is very clear in relation to the EU and the social dimension of globalization. EU documents on the social dimension of globalization have emphasized the role of the ILO, its decent work agenda and CLS. As a result of the World Commission report, and mindful of the critical role played in this topic by employment and work, the ILO is a key player in relation to the social dimension of globalization and, accordingly, an important partner for the EU in this regard.

Therefore, this book takes a narrower approach to the ‘social dimension of globalization’ than the definition suggested by the WCSDG. The contributions mainly focus on the role of labour standards in the Union’s external relations and on Europe’s relationship with the ILO. However, these issues are not studied in isolation, and broader issues such as health, human rights, development and the involvement of civil society are also considered. Moreover, we examine these issues from various perspectives (human rights and international labour law, political science, international relations), geographical dimensions (European neighbourhood and global level), policy domains (trade, development, corporate social responsibility) and international organizations (ILO and WHO). The findings of each chapter are situated within the general literature on European external relations – which has not yet delved fully into this specific topic.

Table 1.1 Core labour standards and fundamental conventions

Gap in the literature

There is no comprehensive account of Europe’s global social role in the literature on European foreign policy. The topic remains one that is largely discussed by policy-makers and civil society, rather than by academics.¹³ Two exceptions to this general statement from legal scholars are work by Clapham and Martignoni (2006) and Novitz (2005), and an important exception from political science is a report written by Bob Deacon (1999) on ‘socially responsible globalization: a challenge for the European Union’. Deacon takes a broad approach to the topic and analyses the Union’s development aid policies and its role in international financial institutions. He identifies the seeds of many of those initiatives that have developed since 2000. As Deacon (1999:19) himself stated: ‘In terms of social policy there are recent signs that the Commission is concerned to inject a more systematic approach and a more assertive approach into what it has called the external dimension of European Social Policy’. Considering the great developments in the politics and policy on the topic since then, it is clearly timely for a directed consideration of the topic to be undertaken.

The EU external relations literature provides the intellectual context without addressing the EU’s external role in relation to the social dimension of globalization directly. A growing number of political science scholars, for example, have highlighted the EU’s international role, including its normative objectives, by addressing particular external policy domains (e.g. Marsh and Mackenstein 2005; Bretherton and Vogler 2006; Elgström and Smith 2006; Orbie 2008), the Union’s role in international organizations (Jörgensen 2008; Laatikainen and Smith 2006), its foreign policy objectives (Smith 2003; Lucarelli and Manners 2006; Mayer and Vogt 2006) or the nature of the Union’s international role (Telò 2006; Sjursen 2007).

Other work addresses specific aspects of the EU’s approach to the social dimension of globalization rather than providing a comprehensive overview. For example, Lister and Carbone (2006) have written on gender and civil society in EU external relations, a number of scholars have written on EU trade and development policies (Holland 2002; Young 2002; Arts and Dickson 2004; Meunier 2006; Carbone 2007; Faber and Orbie 2007), the EU’s role in promoting CLS from a legal perspective (Murray 2001; Novitz 2003), the impact of globalization on work in the EU (Anderton et al. 2006; Eyraud and Vaughan-Whitehead 2007) and the EU’s approach to international human rights in general (Alston 1999; Arts 2000; Fierro 2003).

Evolving EU ambitions: softer instruments, broader objectives

Since the 1990s, the EU’s role in promoting the social dimension of globalization has evolved from a narrow focus on promoting CLS through trade to a broader and more ambitious international social agenda (see also Orbie and Babarinde 2008:461–69). Before outlining the main questions and the conclusions of this book, this section provides a detailed overview of this evolution.

The demise of the social clause

Between 1993 and 2000, the European perspective was influenced by the international debate on a ‘social clause’ in the context of the newly established WTO. Sparked by increased international competition and growing unemployment, most European governments were in favour of a binding linkage between the observation of labour standards and trade rules. Developing countries fiercely resisted this idea fearing hidden protectionism: the pursuit of lofty ideals such as the abolition of child labour would be used to impede developing country market access to Europe, and thus undo their comparative advantage in low-wage production (Lee 1997). However, the EU and its member states always insisted on a preference for rewarding countries that respect core labour standards, rather than an approach sanctioning developing countries. In addition, it was emphasized that Europe did not seek harmonization of social policies and wages, but confined itself to promoting the most fundamental standards linked with respect for human rights: abolition of slavery, forced labour and child labour; freedom to organize; right to collective bargaining.

Despite this European consensus, there were substantial disagreements within the EU on the desirability of integrating labour standards in the trade regime (see Chapter 9). In 1993, France, Belgium and the European Parliament¹⁴ were the ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• List of tables
• List of contributors
• Preface
• List of abbreviations
• 1 From the social clause to the social dimension of globalization
• 2 In search of a coherent social policy: EU import and export of ILO labour standards?
• 3 EU enlargement and social standards: exporting the European social model?
• 4 The social dimension of EU neighbourhood policies
• 5 EU–ILO relations: between regional and global governance
• 6 Writing a new normative standard? EU member states and ILO conventions
• 7 The EU and the ILO Maritime Labour Convention: ‘In our common interest and in the interest of the world’
• 8 The EU and the health dimension of globalization: playing the World Health Organization card
• 9 The social dimension of EU trade policies
• 10 The European corporate social responsibility strategy: a pole of excellence?
• 11 Lobbying the EU for gender-equal development
• 12 Civil society and EU development policies in Africa and Latin America
• 13 The EU’s international promotion of the rights of the child