The Global Context of International Social Work...chapter four dimensions of the global context, namely the social problem, organizational, ideo-logical, and policy dimensions. While

49

3

The Global Context ofInternational Social Work

Introduction

Whether working locally or internationally,social workers who desire to be tuned into inter-national social work require a clear sense of theglobal context within which all such practiceoccurs. This is especially true when working in,or with regard to, developing countries. Thisglobal context will play various roles in relationto practice and the practitioner. At times it willrepresent the operational context within whichthe worker is employed, containing both theemploying agency and the organizational net-work of which that agency is a part. At anotherlevel, the global context, or some aspects of it,will be a contributing factor in the presentingproblems with which the worker is grappling,and appreciating its significance as a causalfactor may be very important. Perhaps lessfrequently, the global context’s potential role inachieving change will be an element in theworker’s overall intervention strategy. Finally,whatever the specific roles that the global con-text is playing within specific situations, what isimportant is that the worker is always able tovisualize the prevailing general global context,

analyze a presenting situation with that contextas an element in the analysis, and develop anintervention strategy that holds together andintegrates the local, national, and internationallevels of context.

We have separated out for discussion in thischapter four dimensions of the global context,namely the social problem, organizational, ideo-logical, and policy dimensions. While all fourdimensions are important in themselves, thefour interact to constitute the global context asit impinges on international social work. Thesocial problem context is often our startingpoint as social workers, in that it is our aware-ness of some global problem such as poverty,refugees, or the HIV/AIDS epidemic that leadsus to take an interest in international socialwork. Pursuing that interest, whether at an aca-demic or practical level, will inevitably lead us toconsider what is being done, by what agencies,and perhaps with what employment opportuni-ties for social workers. The organizational con-text thus becomes of key importance. Furtherconsideration or involvement, however, will leadto an awareness that the motives behind theroles played by various agencies represent a very

03-Cox-Pawar-4727.qxd 5/31/2005 5:52 PM Page 49

important factor. Prevailing motivations reflecta variety of ideological stances and result in arange of policies at all levels of involvement. Weshall, therefore, reflect briefly on the ideologicaland policy dimensions of the global context.

We shall commence with a brief overview ofglobal social problems, using the term “social”because our focus is on the general relevance ofglobal problems to the well-being of people andtheir communities and societies.

The GlobalSocial Problems Context

This is not the place for a detailed analysis ofglobal social problems, yet it is important thatthose working in, or proposing to work in, inter-national social work possess a general under-standing of at least the major global socialproblems. We need to be aware of several aspectsof this dimension of the global context:

1. What are the main global social problems?

2. What numbers of people are affected bythese problems and where in the worldare they concentrated?

3. In general terms, what are the maincauses of these problems, and to whatdegree are they interrelated?

4. In general terms, how has the interna-tional community been responding tothese problems?

5. In general terms, have these problemsbeen reducing significantly in scope andseverity in recent decades, and if not,what additional types of interventionseem to be required?

We are distinguishing between, first, the needto understand the world as a whole in terms ofthe prevailing major global social problems;second, the need for the worker who specializesin a particular field of international social workto understand that field in some considerabledetail for purposes of, for example, guidingoverall policy and program developments; and,third, the local workers specializing in one ormore fields needing to appreciate not onlythe relevant global context but also all aspects ofthe field in which they are involved within a rel-atively circumscribed geographical area. At thispoint our focus is on the first level, namely a

50——INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL WORK

Learning Objectives

The main learning objectives of this chapter are to alert readers to

• Major global social problems, such as poverty, conflicts and wars, forced migration, theAIDS epidemic, etc., and the need for international social workers to be aware of theseproblems.

• The range of organizations established by national governments, the UN, regional associ-ations, and NGOs for addressing global social problems, and the importance of this orga-nizational context for international social work practice.

• The ideological context in terms of dominant and competing ideologies, and their impacton international developments.

• Global economic, social, and related policies and their significance for international socialwork practice.

• The roles that these organizations, ideologies, and policies together play in responding toglobal problems.


global understanding. For the fields that wehave selected for more detailed attention later inthis text, our focus will be on the second level,namely programs and strategies for respondingto global social problems.

Poverty and Interacting Fields

Poverty, with its associated problems such asinfant mortality, malnutrition, and vulnerabil-ity, is commonly regarded as the world’s mostserious problem. Depending on how poverty isdefined and measured, no one would disputethe claim that, at the very least, approximatelyone in every three of the world’s people lives inpoverty. This is partly because many peoplearound the globe exist so close to the povertyline that any one of a number of commonoccurrences, even at a minor level, will pushthem into poverty. Such occurrences includeeconomic changes, such as increases in inflationrates, deteriorating trade arrangements, orreductions in a government’s subsidies of basicnecessities; ecological changes, such as deterio-ration of the environment or depletion of essen-tial food sources; social conflict within a nationor war between nations; demographic changesthrough migration or natural increase; and nat-ural disasters that destroy people’s homes andlivelihoods.

The international community has, in thepost–World War II decades, made many com-mitments to reducing poverty rates, the mostrecent being to halve the global poverty rate by2015. Moreover, much aid and developmentwork has had this goal in mind, with fundingagencies such as the World Bank increasinglyrequiring that every project submitted by statesfor funding contain a poverty reduction com-ponent. However, despite the best of intentionsand endeavors, and while poverty rates havedropped significantly in a few countries, theyhave fluctuated significantly in many developingcountries since the 1980s, and they have notbeen significantly reduced as a whole. This ispartly because poverty is an outcome of many

causal factors that are very difficult to control,partly because poverty rates are often main-tained by high population growth rates in thepoorest parts of the world, and partly due to alack of commitment to reducing poverty on thepart of many governments.

The Plight of Children

A recent report from the United NationsChildren’s Fund (UNICEF) presents the alarm-ing situation that 50 percent of the world’schildren are significantly affected by poverty,conflict, or the AIDS epidemic. This alarmingsituation is reflected in high rates of malnutri-tion and high infant and child mortality ratesin many parts of the world; large numbers ofchildren being forced into deleterious childlabor conditions; many children being vulnera-ble to child slavery, often associated with childprostitution and other abuses; and large num-bers of orphans and other children being aban-doned, or placed in poor quality orphanages, orotherwise subject to neglect and abuse.

The plight of children is clearly a multicausalsituation. It is, moreover, a deteriorating situa-tion, despite the work of organizations likeUNICEF, Save The Children, and many others.

The Plight of Women

It might surprise some western readers that,after long and hard-fought campaigns for gen-der equality, we should still be highlighting theplight of women. In many contexts, women beara disproportionate burden in relation to familylife generally and such phenomena as displace-ment. Women are also more vulnerable thanmen in many contexts, especially during warsand civil conflict. In situations of poverty,women carry a disproportionate share of therisks and consequences, so that it is common tospeak of the “feminization of poverty.” Finally, inmany nations, culture places women at a signif-icant disadvantage. Among the customs that arethe object of ongoing and active concern are

The Global Context of International Social Work——51


arranged marriages; female genital mutilation;an inability of women to own property, accesscredit, or inherit; the acceptance of wife beat-ings, rape within marriage, and other forms ofdomestic abuse; and the virtual slavery con-ditions of many women within pre- and post-marriage contexts.

Once again, many organizations and move-ments are devoted to enhancing the rights ofwomen, achieving gender equality, offeringprotection to vulnerable women, and respond-ing directly to the needs presented by women.Unfortunately, progress in this area seems oftento be painfully slow.

The Extent of Conflict

A reading of any global history reveals theextremely common inability of social groupings,nations, and empires to live at peace with theirneighbors. In pursuit of territory, booty of allkinds, slaves, power, and status, conflict at alllevels has been a significant aspect of the humanstory. The last century witnessed two of theworst wars known to history, and since the endof the Cold War in 1989 the scourge of civil warhas intensified alarmingly. In recent times, theworld has been experiencing upwards of 30 civilwars at any one time, with very high casualtyfigures, especially among civilians.

A major goal of the UN is world peace,yet its work and that of national governmentsand regional associations, along with that ofmany organizations of civil society, havetogether failed to do more than perhaps containmany situations. Only when we add togetherthe widespread consequences of conflict onpeople’s personal lives and social contexts, eco-nomic conditions, physical infrastructure, andthe environment, do we begin to appreciate theenormity of this global problem. Yet becauseconflict once again has many causes, it seemsdifficult for the international community to sig-nificantly reduce the impact of conflict in theforeseeable future. Finally, it has become clear in

recent times that rebuilding a society afterconflict is a complex, hugely expensive, andextremely difficult undertaking.

Natural Disastersand Ecological Degradation

Recent reports reveal the extent to whichnatural disasters have increased in frequencyand severity, whatever the reasons for this. Thecosts of responding quickly and effectively tonatural disasters are truly great, yet they paleinto insignificance when compared with the costof repairing the damage caused by disasters, tosay nothing of supporting the people until amodicum of economic and social functioning isrestored.

Natural disasters are acute dramatic eventsthat gain immediate attention. Ecological degra-dation is a more insidious problem that usuallycreeps up on people slowly, with its inevitableconsequences gradually eating away at people’sstandards of well-being. Moreover, given frequentcontroversy over the precise causes of the degra-dation and the appropriateness of various possi-ble responses, action tends to be piecemeal andinsufficient until it becomes almost too late to act.

Both natural disasters and ecological degra-dation tend to have a greater impact on poorerpeople, partly because it is the poor who areobliged to live in areas more susceptible to bothoccurrences, and partly because the quality oftheir homes and the nature of their daily exis-tence render them more vulnerable.

The UnevenDevelopment of Nations

Allied closely to all of the above problemsis the need for all countries of the world toachieve levels and forms of development thatare consistent with that country’s economic,social, political, cultural, and ecological needs.This goal was recognized and accepted interna-tionally in the aftermath of World War II, with



very high volumes of resources being devoted toglobal development since then. Yet despite allthe efforts and expenditure, progress on thedevelopment front generally has been unevenand somewhat erratic. Some one quarter of theworld’s approximately 200 nation-states remainclassified as “least developed,” while others areclassified as “developing” but with unacceptablelow achievement levels in some aspects of thatdevelopment. There is also widespread concernat the plight of “failed states”—states wheregovernance is not adequate to provide a basisfor development. There is also an acknowledge-ment of the uneven development of manystates—states where some sections of the coun-try and populace have done quite well whileothers languish in poverty or with inadequatelevels of development.

It would seem to be the case that, if develop-ment aid of all kinds were made available bystates on the recommended basis of 0.7 percentof GDP, and if that aid were then devoted toglobal development on the basis of needs (notself-interest), the current development situationcould be fairly speedily rectified. It seems,however, that this is unlikely to happen in theforeseeable future, and that the world will con-tinue to be a very uneven place in terms ofprevailing levels of development.

The Uneven Impactof Most Global Problems

Many readers will be familiar with the bibli-cal saying that to those who have more will begiven, and the relevance of this to the modernworld is difficult to ignore. Many countries arevulnerable, in the first place, because their geo-graphical conditions or location—for example,small, remote, landlocked and island states—have held back their development. Some of theseare also in regions of the world more prone tonatural disasters. If these countries experiencehigh rates of population growth, and especiallyif the land is ecologically fragile, poverty is likely

to spread widely and development be furtherimpaired. These outcomes may then result inlow levels of social cohesion and poor gover-nance, resulting in high levels of social tension,corruption, and inefficiency.

It is not a coincidence that some 90 percent ofglobal population growth is in the poorer partsof the world, that most civil wars take place indeveloping countries, that poorer countries aremore prone to the ravages of natural disasters,and that trade and investment flows tend tofavor the better-off or more developed states.Hence many countries are very seriouslyaffected by virtually all of the main global socialproblems, the cumulative impact of which canbe horrendous.

Given this situation, one might think thatthe bulk of the efforts of the international com-munity would be devoted to rectifying globalinequality. Unfortunately, this is not the case.When countries or regions are given such labelsas “basket cases” or “bottomless pits” in terms ofabsorbing aid, or when governments are corruptor inefficient or have failed, there is a reluctanceto devote too many resources to them because todo so seems to be an inefficient use of resourcesand is politically unpopular. Hence poor situa-tions may deteriorate further.

The Displacement andForced Migration of People

One inevitable consequence of extremepoverty, widespread social conflict, seriousnatural disasters, ecological degradation, andlow levels of development is that many peopleare forced to leave their usual place of abode andseek refuge, assistance, or a better future else-where. In reality, only a small proportion ofpeople affected by such events are able to leave.Many will stay and die, and many linger on inpoverty and fear, for flight is simply not a viableor acceptable option for them.

Official figures place the numbers of dis-placed persons at around 50 million, although



in many situations only rough estimates arepossible. Even if this number is reasonably accu-rate, the impact of the displacement of 50 millionpeople on the people themselves, often on theareas from which they originate, and certainlyon the areas to which they flee, is substantial. Thetasks of protecting, providing sustenance for on anongoing basis, and finding a satisfactory solutionto the plight of 50 million people are huge: when,however, those displaced are unwelcome guests inforeign lands, or are destabilizing local economicand social stability levels yet have nowhere else togo, the challenge becomes massive.

The UN and various organizations of globaland local civil society have made the care ofthe world’s displaced a major concern. However,these organizations can seldom influence theforces that cause displacement, and those forcesfrequently result in a sudden and massive exo-dus of people requiring a large-scale emergencyresponse. Moreover, the huge cost of respondingto displacement is seldom met by the interna-tional community, so that in recent times manydisplaced persons have not survived their ordeal.Nor is the situation helped by the fear of westernand other countries that displaced personsmight seek to breech their borders and imposethemselves on a nation as uninvited guests.

The HIV/AIDS Epidemic andOther Global Health Concerns

HIV/AIDS became a significant healthconcern in the 1980s, and in the 1990s was seenas “the greatest shock to development” (UNDP,2003, p. 41). This report estimates the numbersof people infected at around 42 million, withsome 22 million already killed and 13 millionleft orphans. In addition to its destruction ofhuman life, HIV/AIDS is throwing developmentoff course in much of Africa by devastatingworkforces generally and key groups such asteachers particularly (e.g., Zambia lost 1,300teachers in one year). Beyond Africa, China,India, and the Russian Federation are among

those countries experiencing soaring rates ofinfection, while few countries are escaping theepidemic.

While HIV/AIDS is the major current healthconcern it is certainly not the only one. Maternalmortality, at its most urgent in sub-SaharanAfrica; child mortality, especially in sub-SaharanAfrica and South Asia; tuberculosis (killing up totwo million people a year), and malaria (killingsome one million people a year) are among othermajor health concerns.

Global Social Problems andInternational Social Work

There are several reasons why social workerscontributing to international social work needto possess a general awareness of global socialproblems, in addition, of course, to a preciseawareness of those social problems dominatingthe areas (field and geographical) where they areworking.

First is the fact that it is these major socialproblems that largely determine the very natureand existence of the international community.The evolution of international structures, thework on global policy, and the deployment ofresources are all largely determined by the focuson poverty, conflict and armaments issues,international terrorism, global crime, refugeemovements, the abuse and exploitation ofchildren and women, ecological concerns, andso on, and social workers need to be aware ofhow and why these concerns drive global agen-das. (See the discussion of the internationalcommunity’s millennium development goals inUNDP, 2003.)

Second, there is virtually no work situation,especially in developing countries, in whichinternational social workers are to be foundthat will not be affected at a significant level byprobably several of these global concerns. Nopopulation or situation is immune, especially indeveloping countries, and social workers need tobe able to relate local situations to global trends.



Third, it follows that wherever and atwhatever level social workers are working, theyshould have in mind their obligation to con-tribute, where possible, to the evolution of globalpolicies and programs relating to these globalconcerns. The knowledge and experience thatinternational social workers derive from theirfieldwork are of great importance when theinternational community at the macro levelseeks to formulate a response to a global problemor some dimension thereof. For example, whenthe Hague Conference on Private InternationalLaw sought to establish a set of principles per-taining to international child abductions, theyapproached International Social Service and itsworkers worldwide to furnish them with rele-vant case data. In more recent years, it has beenNGOs working in the HIV/AIDS field that havecampaigned for international action, and con-tributed vital information and suggestions as tothe directions that such action should take.

Fourth, an understanding of the global real-ities pertaining to any problem situation makespossible a better analysis of a local situation—for example, by incorporating the globaldimension—and facilitates a better inter-vention strategy by encouraging the worker todraw on international experience as a guide.The international comparative approach hasmuch to commend it.

Fifth, the fact that a network of agencies andconventions and so on have been brought tobear on any global social problem at the inter-national level means that there is potentiallyavailable to workers in the field a wide range ofresources—provided that workers are aware ofwhat has been happening globally. Various UNagencies provide technical assistance to govern-ments but also at times to NGOs; a range ofinternational reports are potentially helpful toworkers; workers may explore the relevantnetworks in search of advice; the relevantactive international community agencies may besources of funding or other resources to assistlocal initiatives; and so on. The possibility for

local workers in the international field to tap theinternational community is always there and isusually highly beneficial.

The Organizational Context

The second dimension of the global context thatinternational social workers need to understandis the organizational context. The global contextcan be conceived of as a range of internationalorganizations, often referred to rather looselyas the international community. The range isextremely wide, consisting of several key cate-gories of agencies, each of which is in itselfhighly varied and complex. The main categoriesof organizations are:

• national governments and the agenciesthey establish for international work;

• intergovernmental agencies establishedby groups of nations, including regionalassociations such as the European Unionand African Union;

• the UN system established and supportedby the great majority of states;

• corporations, especially the transnationalor multinational ones (TNCs or MNCs);

• nongovernment organizations operatinginternationally (INGOs); and

• the other organs of global civil society,such as social movements, labor move-ments, religious movements, and culturalassociations.

Each of these categories has important rolesto play internationally, and their actions deter-mine much of the global context and its ongo-ing development. Furthermore, the interactionbetween these categories of organizations, andbetween the plethora of individual organizationsof which each category is composed, is a furtherimportant dimension of global developments.While each category warrants a textbook, or atleast a full chapter—given their size, complexity,



and importance—we shall briefly comment oneach category and leave it for the reader toexplore further. Before doing so, however, let usreflect on what preceded the emergence of theinternational community.

The Beginnings ofan International Community

For many centuries, world affairs weredominated economically by traders and tradingroutes and politically by the concept of “balanceof power.” As Eban (1983, pp. 243–44) explains,“balance of power” was an ambiguous concept.On the one hand, it implied a quest for equilib-rium that, if achieved, would result in peacebetween nations with each apprehensive abouttaking up arms against another. Others, how-ever, saw it more as a quest for superiority bystates, so that balance really meant imbalanceand the pursuit of national interests, includ-ing developing the ability to defeat aggressors.Within this system, war was the ultimate sanc-tion: “The logic of the balance system requiresthat those who uphold it must threaten to fightagainst those who challenge it,” and such athreat will supposedly deter would-be aggres-sors. However, as Eban points out, “both of theworld wars . . . reveal the fragility of deterrentsystems based on the assumption of total ratio-nality” (p. 244). Hence not surprisingly, afterthe horrors of the First World War initially andthen those of the Second World War, there wasa drive to initiate what Eban calls “a new diplo-macy”—“a movement for international organi-zations.” This movement aspires to organizenation-states into a universal community, all ofwhose members are committed to mutual assis-tance in accordance with an objectively bindingcode. Its aim is nothing less than world peaceunder law. In this conception what each mem-ber of the community owes to the other doesnot depend on individual discretion accordingto each member’s predilections, solidarities,and interests:

The UN system aspires to reconcile nationalsovereignty with world order. The guidingprinciple of the UN idea was collectivesecurity. This requires the creation of such apreponderance of power that no single stateor group of states can hope to withstand it.(Eban, 1983, p. 239)

With hindsight, the Cold War that ran fromthe end of World War II to 1989, the divisionbetween western and third world or developingcountry interests (as reflected in, for example, theBandung Conference in 1955 of nonaligned statesand in voting patterns in the UN GeneralAssembly), and the post–Cold War dominance bythe United States as the only global power wereamong the many factors that worked againstthe short-term achievement of the vision that laybehind the establishment of the internationalcommunity. Other ongoing concerns includedthe difficulty that states and international organi-zations often experienced in reconciling nationalinterests or sovereignty and a new world order,the difficulty that the emerging INGO sectoroften had in collaborating with the global eco-nomic institutions such as the World Bank andthe International Monetary Fund (IMF), and thedifficulty in fitting the TNCs—with their appar-ently distinctive and self- or profit-centeredgoals—into the overall international community.Nonetheless, there was no doubt that an interna-tional community was and is emerging, and therecontinues into the twenty-first century to be greathopes for a future under its leadership.

National Governmentsand the Agencies TheyEstablish for International Work

No matter how much some people mightdesire the focus to be on international organi-zations, there can be no doubt that the mostsignificant players on the international stageremain the nation-states. Against such claims asthat globalization has overtaken the state, and



that TNCs are not only not subject to thecontrol of states but often more wealthy thanthey are, states remain very much alive and well.All major global economic and political associa-tions are made up of member states, andalthough such associations may act against astate member or seek to influence its internalaffairs (e.g., the World Bank or EuropeanUnion), the status of the state retains itsintegrity and much of its importance. Moreover,individual states have shown themselves able toact unilaterally in either the pursuit of interna-tional goals (e.g., the United States) or in pursuitof national goals that contravene global agree-ments (e.g., Burma/Myanmar, North Korea, andmany others).

At another level, many individual states pur-sue their national interests through the operationof internationally oriented agencies—the inter-national or foreign aid departments that in theWest are sometimes located within ministries offoreign affairs. These agencies frequently operatevery large aid programs, working through boththe NGO sector and through bilateral develop-ments undertaken with other governments.States are interested in trade arrangements andfrequently enter into bilateral arrangements inthis area; they retain the need to be ready todefend themselves against possible aggressors,through intelligence gathering operations ormilitary establishments; they relate to worldpopulation mobility through the establishmentof various migration and asylum seeker pro-grams and tourism arrangements; and theyengage in aid and development work, partly attimes for altruistic reasons but sometimes as anextension of the pursuit of national interests.Moreover, the network of diplomatic activityundertaken by states seeks to maintain a nationalawareness of developments around the globe,especially of those likely to constitute a potentialthreat to national interests, such as terrorism andhuman trafficking.

On another level again, writers on globaldevelopment are very aware of the potential

threat to global economic and political stabilityof what is commonly referred to as “poor gover-nance.” Such is the nature of global inter-connectedness that poor governance not onlyundermines the well-being of the people of thestate in question, but has potential consequencesfor many others (e.g., through encouraging asy-lum seekers or illegal migrants, causing internalconflict with widespread external ramifications,and undermining external economic relations).

A further important issue for the interna-tional community that will increasingly affectthe roles of national governments is determin-ing in what circumstances it should take actionto change a course of events within a sovereignstate, usually through the UN but also throughregional state bodies such as the EuropeanUnion and African Union. The internationalcommunity, or various organs within it, havesometimes taken action and sometimes with-held from taking action, and have been criticizedfor both types of decisions. How important andhow justifiable today is the maintenance of theintegrity of the sovereign state? Does the sover-eign state take precedence over the internationalprotection of people’s human rights, or inter-national prevention of ecological vandalism, orinternational rejection of the perpetuation ofextreme poverty, or an international right tobring to justice those accused of crimes againsthumanity?

Finally, the question of the long-term viabil-ity of states has to be considered seriously, espe-cially as, on the one hand, some states are clearlyfailing, and, on the other hand, pressure isexerted to divide a number of states into theirconstituent ethnic or religious components,thus creating a larger number of smaller states.(See recent developments in the former USSR,Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia.) There is also amajor concern for the world’s poorest states—many of which are landlocked, small islandstates—and states that have never reallyachieved a significant measure of state identityor national governance. It may well be that the



only answer for such states is to becomemembers of wider regional associations that willunderwrite their development and support theirongoing functioning, while recognizing theirnational identity and autonomy to a least somedegree, as we have seen happen in the EuropeanUnion and to some degree in the Pacific.

While states continue to be the major playerson the world stage in many ways, a range of ques-tions surrounds their very existence in some cases,and in all cases their specific roles within theworld community. To what extent states will con-tinue as we know them today remains one of themany ongoing questions in considering the globalcontext. What is certain, however, is that manysocial workers engaged in international work willbe employed by states, work under state auspicesto some degree, interact regularly with stateagencies, and be involved in addressing situationswhich are at least in part an outcome of stateactions. (For detailed discussions of the future ofmodern states and their roles see, for example,World Bank, 1997; Holton, 1998; Randall andTheobald, 1998; and Duffield, 2001, pp.163ff.)

IntergovernmentalAgencies Established byGroups of Nations, IncludingRegional Associations Such as theEuropean Union and African Union

The obvious distance between many statesand international structures, such as the UN, canleave such states feeling insignificant and ratherlost on this international stage. It is not surpris-ing, therefore, that many political leaders andstates have regarded associations of states withincircumscribed areas, within which they sharecommon interests and concerns, as essential tothe state and as a necessary first step to effectiveglobal associations such as the UN. There areindeed many regional associations, of whichsome of the best known are the European Union(EU), Organization of American States, AfricanUnion (formerly the Organization of African

Unity), Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation(APEC) and Arab League. In addition, areas ofAfrica, Asia, and Latin America have formedmany subregional associations, such as theAssociation of Southeast Asian Countries(ASEAN) and the Economic Community ofWest African States (ECOWAS). To a significantdegree these regional and subregional associa-tions remain in their infancy. Issues of a regionalparliament, common policies and institutions,and a common currency have taken center stagein the evolution of the European Union; how-ever, the question as to whether this union is ablueprint for other such developments, orwhether Europe has unique characteristicsthat might render its export of the concept of aregional federation as dubious as its export of theconcept of the nation-state in an earlier century,remains one that is difficult to answer. On theface of it, however, regional associations makemuch sense and could be an important stepping-stone to global security and well-being.

The United Nations System

The UN system is the first truly global systemin history, with almost all states being membersof it and supporting its key roles to at least asignificant degree. That it remains an evolvingsystem is obvious, with much of its structurereflecting the realities prevailing at the end ofWorld War II when it was established, and soinevitably requiring reform 60 years later.Understandably, a key role of the newly estab-lished system was to seek to ensure that a warsuch as that recently endured during 1939–1945would never be repeated. As Eban (1983, p. 239)writes of the UN: “While its responsibilities wereto cover many fields of action and struggle, itsmajor task had always been deemed to lie in theprevention, cessation and termination of armedconflict.”

This task lay essentially with the SecurityCouncil, the composition of which has becomeincreasingly outdated and ineffective in fulfilling



its key role. In 2004, a UN panel called for theSecurity Council to be expanded from 15 to 24members, giving broader representation todeveloping countries. It recommended that sixnew permanent members be added to the exist-ing five–two from Asia, two from Africa, onefrom the Americas, and one from Europe.

The UN system was also to have a major rolein global economic and social development. Keyeconomic roles were given to the InternationalBank for Reconstruction and Development(later renamed the World Bank), the Inter-national Monetary Fund and the General Agree-ment on Trade and Tariffs (later renamedthe World Trade Organization or WTO), andalthough these bodies were essentially indepen-dent of the UN itself they were clearly estab-lished as important components of the UNsystem. The World Bank is owned by its 181member countries, controlled by its own boardand based in Washington, D. C. It providesdevelopment funds, mainly in the form of inter-est-bearing loans, to needy developing statestogether with technical assistance. It has beenagreed that the United States nominates thehead of the World Bank. The IMF was set up tomonitor and regulate the international mone-tary system. It is financially independent of theUN although it reports to it. Its short-term loansare designed to bring stability to internationalexchange rates and alleviate serious balance ofpayments problems. The perceived problem,however, is that the loans tend to be conditionalon the recipient states adopting a range ofpolicies—policies largely reflecting westernneoliberal thinking. The WTO, with currently142 members, has had as its core aim the reduc-tion of tariffs on internationally traded goodsand services based on a free trade philosophy.More recently, it has moved also into the protec-tion of intellectual property rights. Considerablecontroversy surrounds almost all aspects ofits work. (See Todaro, 1997, part 3; and Todaroand Smith, 2003, pp. 584–87 and 626–30 for adetailed discussion of these agencies.)

The roles of the mainstream UN system ineconomic and social development are moreclosely related to direct development aid, involv-ing the provision of funding, technical assis-tance, and opportunities for states and agenciesto share experiences and plan strategies. To carryout these purposes, there is a range of agenciesreporting to either ECOSOC (the Economic andSocial Council) or directly to the GeneralAssembly. Gordon (1994, p. 72) sets out thegoals underpinning this work:

Chapter IX of the [UN] charter deals with thegeneral subject of international economicand social cooperation, and chapter X dealsspecifically with the organisation and func-tions of ECOSOC. Article 55 of chapter IXreads:

With a view to the creation of conditionsof stability and well-being which are neces-sary for peaceful and friendly relationsamong nations based on respect for the prin-ciple of equal rights and self-determinationof peoples, the United Nations shall promote:

a. higher standards of living, full employ-ment and conditions of economic andsocial progress and development;

b. solutions of international economic,social, health, and related problems,and international cultural and educa-tional cooperation; and

c. universal respect for, and observance ofhuman rights and fundamental free-doms for all without distinction as torace, sex, language, or religion.

Among the many agencies entrusted withthese goals are the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP), World Food Programme(WFP), World Health Organisation (WHO),UN Environmental Programme (UNEP), UNEducation, Scientific and Cultural Organisa-tion (UNESCO), UN High Commissioner forRefugees (UNHCR), Human Rights Commission,Commission for Social Development, Food and



Agricultural Organisation (FAO), UN Children’sFund (UNICEF), and the UN Centre for HumanSettlements (HABITAT).

In addition to the central UN agencies, withtheir global mandates, ECOSOC has its regionalequivalents, such as the Economic and SocialCommission for Asia Pacific (ESCAP), withtheir own divisions and programs.

A further important role of the UN systemis its adoption of declarations and conventionson various topics. These have been of particularimportance in the field of human rights, begin-ning with the Universal Declaration of HumanRights adopted in 1948 (see UNDP, 2000). Thedifficulty in this field has been in the area ofcompliance. As Donnelly (1993, p. 11) puts it,states “did not agree to let the UN investigatetheir compliance with these standards.” Thesame situation has applied in the area ofinternational law more generally. States wereexpected to sign the various UN treaties andincorporate their provisions within state legalsystems. The outcome, as Donnelly says, is abody of international law—“Customary rules ofinternational law are well-established state prac-tices to which a sense of obligation has come tobe attached.” The difficulties here have beentwofold. First, a number of states have either notratified a treaty or have failed to incorporate it instate law. Second, the enforcement of interna-tional law remains highly problematic, despitethe existence of the International Court ofJustice, the International Criminal Court andvarious specific tribunals to investigate crimesagainst humanity (see Robertson, 2000).

There are various texts describing the UNsystem and discussing its strengths and weak-nesses (e.g., see Gordon, 1994). What is impor-tant is that the international social workerpossesses a realistic appreciation of its effective-ness. From experience, it is all too easy to havefar higher expectations of the UN than it iscapable of fulfilling (e.g., because of its depen-dence on the support of states), and, alterna-tively, to become so skeptical of the body thatone overlooks both its past achievements and its

future potential. It is a system with strengths andweaknesses; moreover, as is often said, in termsof a global system it is all that we have, and itis therefore incumbent on us all to do what wecan to make it work, hopefully even better in thefuture than it has in the past.

Corporations, Especiallythe Transnational Ones

There is a tendency for international socialworkers to dismiss the private for-profit sectorat the international level (the TNCs—transna-tional corporations or MNCs—multinationalcorporations) as either irrelevant to their workor as highly deleterious in their impact on statesand on people’s lives. Whatever one’s view onthe potential of TNCs to bring harm or good tothe world, their existence and importance onmany levels cannot be ignored. Todaro (1997,pp. 534–43) begins his discussion of MNCs asfollows:

Few developments have played as critical arole in the extraordinary growth of interna-tional trade and capital flows during the pastfew decades as the rise of the multinationalcorporation (MNC).

Todaro proceeds to discuss the size of thesebodies, pointing out that they are far larger thanmany states, that they control 70 percent ofworld trade, that they generally dominate theareas of production, distribution, and sale ofmany goods from developing countries, thatthey exercise power in a variety of ways, and thatthey are concentrated in a few western countries(44 of the 100 largest are headquartered in theUnited States alone). In terms of the controversyover the roles of TNCs, Todaro suggests that itis really a controversy over the developmentprocess. He writes,

The controversy over the role and impact ofprivate foreign investment often has as itsbasis a fundamental disagreement about the



nature, style, and character of a desirabledevelopment process. (pp. 537–38)

In his own assessment of the pros and cons ofMNC activities, Todaro stresses the complexityof the question and concludes,

Perhaps the only valid general conclusion isthat private foreign investment can be animportant stimulus to economic and socialdevelopment as long as the interests of MNCsand host country governments coincide(assuming of course that they don’t coincidealong the lines of dualistic development andwidening inequalities. (p. 543)

Todaro accepts that MNCs will continue to“gravitate toward the most profitable investmentopportunities, engage in transfer pricing, andrepatriate profits,” (p. 543) but he is uncertain asto whether the net outcome of their involvementwill be positive or negative.

Other writers have a far more negativeimpression of the impact of MNCs or TNCs oneconomic development generally and develop-ing countries in particular. One outspoken criticof TNCs is Korten (1995) who writes of theTNC agenda,

It is a conscious and intentional transforma-tion in search of a new world economic orderin which business has no nationality andknows no borders. It is driven by globaldreams of vast corporate empires, compliantgovernments, a globalized consumer mono-culture, and a universal ideological commit-ment to corporate libertarianism.

While much of what Korten and others sayin criticism of the TNCs sounds convincing,the reality is that TNCs do exist and will con-tinue to play major roles on the world stage.The goal should therefore be that the UNsystem and global civil society will increasinglybe able to expand the potential for good thatthe TNCs certainly possess, influence their

agendas by increasing their awareness of certainrealities, and generally learn to cooperate withthis critical sector.

Nongovernment AgenciesOperating Internationally (INGOs)

International nongovernment organizations(INGOs) have a long history (see Kaldor, 2003,chap. 4). The oldest of the well-known INGOs isthe Red Cross, founded in 1863, but manyChristian humanitarian organizations, Jewishwelfare agencies, and the American MedicalAssociation were founded even earlier (Beigbeder,1991, pp. 8–9). Many other NGOs were estab-lished in the period of the 1920s to the 1960s, butthe great expansion of NGOs generally and ofINGOs in particular began in the 1970s. Therange of INGOs is enormous (see Korten, 1990,p. 2; Kaldor, 2003, chap.4). Some have budgetslarger than those of many nations, operate glob-ally, and are widely known. Others have smallbudgets and a limited range of activities and areknown only in the circles within which they oper-ate. The internal structure of INGOs also variesgreatly. Some are highly structured organization-ally with an employer-employee structure, andothers are extremely loose, operating largely asumbrellas for personal initiatives. Fundingarrangements are a further important variable.Some INGOs are almost completely dependenton receiving contracts from other agencies or ondonor agency funding for programs they develop,while others—especially the religious agencies—have a constituency on which they depend fordonations. This funding variable is extremelyimportant in determining the extent of the inde-pendence of agencies and hence their ability todisplay initiative

As with all sections of global organizations,the INGO sector has its strengths and weak-nesses. While it used to be widely assumed thatall NGOs generally had more ability than othersectors to respond to newly emerging needs, ininnovative ways, and on the basis of principlessuch as people’s participation, this is certainly



not a valid assumption today. As governmentsand the UN increasingly pursue their goalsthrough the NGO sector, as NGOs and INGOsbecome more and more dependent on externalformal funding sources, and as more and moreINGOs for whatever reason adopt bureaucraticstructures and administrative procedures, thenature of INGOs is inevitably changed. It usedalso to be assumed, perhaps wrongly, that theNGO sector shared common values and wouldinstinctively work together for the commongood. Whatever the past reality, a common com-plaint about INGOs is that they compete witheach other—for funds, for a prominent share ofa specific task, for media coverage, for person-nel, and for kudos. There is a noted inability orunwillingness to cooperate or collaborate inmany contexts, and a tendency for the sheernumbers of INGOs involved in many situationsto constitute a major problem in efficiently andeffectively responding to a designated area ofneed. (Examples include the refugee and post-conflict reconstruction field but also manyaspects of local level development. See, forexample, Duffield, 2001, pp. 53ff.)

Understandably perhaps, the quality ofthe work carried out by INGOs varies greatly.This may be due in part to inadequate funding,inappropriate staff recruitment, poor programdesign or management, or inexperience in thefield. The large number of NGOs and INGOscompeting for funding even allows a few bogusNGOs to attempt to obtain a share of availablefunds fraudulently. Moreover, the tendency ofINGOs to pursue funding sources, and thereforeprograms popular with donors, will adverselyaffect their ability to respond effectively to anoverall presenting situation, thus detractingfrom the sector’s ability to complement the con-tribution of the government and for-profit sec-tors. (On NGOs and INGOs in development, seeEdwards and Hulme, 1992; Poulton and Harris,1988; Korten, 1990; and UNDP, 1993, chap. 5.)

In addition to the variables affecting thenature and performance of the NGO sector

generally, there is a considerable literature onNGO-government relations in developing coun-tries (e.g., Holloway, 1989; Fowler, 1991; UN/ESCAP, 1991; Clark, 1993; Heyzer, Riker, andQuizon, 1995). An ESCAP seminar on govern-ment-NGO cooperation in social developmentin 1991 revealed a tremendous diversity amongstates in the Asia-Pacific region in this regard,ranging from the practical outlawing of theNGO sector, to significant levels of mutual suspi-cion to close cooperation, making it difficult anddangerous to generalize. What it did reveal wasan issue requiring considerable work, and thereport of the seminar makes a number of recom-mendations. This focus on barriers to state-NGOrelations and development of recommendationsfor overcoming these is common to most writersin the field. The prevailing conclusions are thatthere remains a long way to go in building strongand cooperative state-NGO relations in manydeveloping countries, that the goal is extremelyimportant, and that there are a number of read-ily identifiable strategies for achieving this goal.Some of the literature focuses extensively onstate legislation pertaining to the NGO sector,which currently varies greatly across states, as thestarting point for achieving better relations.

We should also be aware of relationshipsbetween the INGOs and the UN system (seeOtto, 1996; Willetts, 1996; Weiss and Gordenker,1996). In his foreword to the Weiss andGordenker publication, Boutros Boutros-Gali,then the secretary-general of the UN, stressesthe importance of the NGO sector within theUN system in “the maintenance and establish-ment of peace” and “the areas of assistance,mobilization, and democratization activities.”The only mention of NGOs in the UN charteris in article 71, which empowers ECOSOC to“make suitable arrangements for consultationwith non-governmental organizations which areconcerned with matters within its competence.”Since 1968, NGOs having a representative andinternational character have been entitled toadmission to consultative status in the UN,



supervised by the Committee on NGOs. NGOsand INGOs also operate within the system aslobbyists (see Kaldor, 2003, pp. 90–91), and byattending the NGO forums that parallel mostUN Global Forums composed of governmentrepresentatives. How much influence the NGOsector has within the UN system is, however,very difficult to determine. Certainly the delib-erations and recommendations of the trans-national federations of NGOs and INGOs aremuch more likely to influence outcomes thanare most individual NGOs and INGOs, andsome agencies within the UN system (e.g., theUNHCR) have been instrumental in establish-ing or encouraging NGO federations able toprovide an input within specific fields of work.

Finally, reference should be made to theimportant role of the INGOs within the emergingglobal civil society, but we shall defer discussionof this to the final section in this review of theorganizational dimension of the global context.

Global Civil Society

Shaw (1994, p. 647) has defined civil societyas follows: It consists of “the network of institu-tions through which groups in society representthemselves—both to each other and to the state.”In effect, civil society stands alongside the otherthree components of modern society, namelythe state or governance system, the market oreconomic systems, and people-in-community,which components Galtung (1995, p. 204)regards as the different types of power in society.Civil society is usually seen as constituting thelinkages between people-in-community and theeconomic and political systems of the state. Assuch, it enables people to participate in societyin strength, by working together within a rangeof voluntary associations, and so to keep politicaland economic systems accountable. Exactlythe same argument applies to civil society at theglobal level. However, despite these definitions,we need also to be aware that global civil societyis, in the literature, seen in a variety of ways and

given varying degrees of significance, as thefollowing review demonstrates.

The UNDP’s 1997 Human DevelopmentReport warned that, while globalization offersgreat opportunities, it represents also a majorthreat to global equity. Pieterse (1997, p. 374)goes further, commenting that globalization hasled to “the overriding imperative of competitive-ness, resulting in distortions and the sacrifice ofthe interests of the most vulnerable in society.”Hence the key role of global civil society is, as itis at the state level, to seek to ensure that thepolitical and economic forces and systems thatoperate are held accountable to the people. Ifnational civil society aims “to limit arbitrary orabusive state power” (Polidano and Hulme,1997, p. 7), so global civil society representsessentially “transnational political activity”(Pasha, 1996, p. 643) carried out on behalf ofpeople to ensure that global developments are inthe people’s best interests.

Aziz (1995, p. 12) sees global civil society asspearheaded by grassroots movements, thusrepresenting “globalization from below.” Thesemovements reflect concerns such as “the envi-ronment, human rights, women’s issues, sus-tainable development, peace and justice,universal literacy, and liberation from oppres-sion” (Aziz). Rosenau (1995, p. 387) emphasizesmore the collaboration between INGOs, or whathe calls transnational NGOs (TNGOs). Rosenaurefers to the growth in TNGOs as “stunning,”with numbers increasing nineteen times since1956 to more than 18,000 in 1992. Clearly bothINGOs (or TNGOs) and global movementscome together to represent what Stern-Petersson (1993, p. 136) refers to as “the emerg-ing third force in world affairs”—a third forcethat “shares authority and responsibility forglobal policy with actors representing the stateand market.” The Commission on GlobalGovernance (1995, 254) comments that “globalcivil society is best expressed in the global non-government movement,” but elsewhere itsreport points out that this movement covers a



multitude of institutions, voluntary associationsand networks—women’s groups, trade unions,chambers of commerce, farming or housingcooperatives, neighborhood watch associations,religion-based organizations, and so on (p. 32).This Commission recommended that there beestablished, within the UN system, an annualForum of Civil Society.

Kaldor (2003, chap.1) sets out five differentversions of global civil society, all both norma-tive and descriptive. The first is concerned withthe rule of law or civility, with global civil societysignifying cosmopolitan order; the second ver-sion is concerned broadly with all aspects ofeconomic, social, and cultural globalization; thethird version is the activist one concerned withpolitical emancipation, where social movementsand civic activists seek to influence the globalsphere; the fourth version is that of the neolib-erals promoting the benefits of western societythrough global privatization of democracy andhumanitarianism; and, fifth, the postmodernversion seeks “to break with modernity of whicha key component was the nation-state,” and seesglobal civil society as the “plurality of global net-works of contestation.” Kaldor’s own approachincorporates various aspects of these fivedimensions.

While many writers hold high aspirations forglobal civil society, and perhaps realistically sogiven developments to date, we would have toagree with Shaw (1994, p. 635) that “these devel-opments have so far been limited, and thatglobal civil society is still more potential thanactual,” in terms not so much of size as of fulfill-ing the global roles possible. What is importantis that this “globalization-from-below” move-ment continues to strengthen, engage in socialaction, put forward alternative social and eco-nomic policies and development models, andadvocate for the world’s disadvantaged people.Six key roles for civil society, nationally andglobally, emerge from the literature:

mediating between people and national orglobal political structures;

reinforcing social ties between differing, andpotentially competing, groups in society andglobally;

the promotion of democracy or people’sparticipation;

the reflecting and managing of pluralism;

the advocacy of the rights of the disadvan-taged and marginalized or excluded; and

the presenting of needs and of alternativedevelopment models or strategies.

Global civil society must be strong enoughto interact effectively with global economic andpolitical structures, strong enough to representthe needs of all peoples of the world, and strongenough to play a key role in the formulation ofglobal policies and programs that will reflect thebasic principles and rights that constitute theessence of humanity. (A further useful referenceon the contribution of global civil society, espe-cially at the values level, is Bruyn, 2005.)

The Global Organizational Contextand International Social Work

Social workers who enter international socialwork will inevitably find themselves workingwithin a section of the broad global organiza-tional context. The choice of employment pathis indeed one of the first decisions confrontingthe graduate who decides to enter internationalsocial work. Should they participate in their ownnation’s global outreach or move on to the inter-national level? Should they aim to work forthe UN or one of the INGOs? This decision isinevitably linked to the decision as to the field inwhich our graduate will specialize (refugee work,natural disasters, conflict resolution, postconflictreconstruction, etc.), and to a determination ofthe focus of the graduate’s involvement—forexample, policy formulation, program develop-ment and administration, research, or frontlineoperations. Some organizations are muchstronger at one or more of these levels than



others, while most international organizationsspecialize in a particular field of activity. Thus aknowledge of the organizational context of inter-national social work is important for enabling asocial worker to plan his or her career path.

Related to or even independent of theircareer paths, international social workers maychoose to use their knowledge of the organiza-tional context to contribute to the strengtheningof one or more areas. They may, for example,admire the roles and work of the UN and seek toplay a part in its strengthening in general or spe-cific terms. Alternatively, workers may link upwith particular INGOs, such as the Red Crossor Amnesty International, and similarly con-tribute to strengthening their international role.Similarly, many social workers have worked hardto strengthen global civil society, either at a gen-eral level by, for example, lobbying at the UN, ormore specifically by helping to strengthen somecomponent of global civil society, such as thegreen movement. Often of course, the socialworker’s contribution along such lines might becarried out through the profession’s own globalorganizations, such as the IFSW.

Frequently an understanding of the globalorganizational context will become more criticalas international social workers become involvedin a specific local situation. They will want andneed to know what elements within that organi-zational context are potentially relevant to whattheir local situation requires. Can they involveparticular international agencies, or seek fund-ing from them, or involve them in local trainingschemes, or have the agencies’ experts placedwith them for brief periods, and so on. Thisglobal organizational context is potentially themost important resource available to workers atthe local level in most contexts.

Sometimes an understanding of the globalorganizational context is vital in helping work-ers to control their anger and frustration. Fromthe perspective of their local level, workers maybe asking: Why does not the UN intervene? Whycannot the various NGOs cooperate? Why arethese national agencies blocking our endeavors?

Only by understanding the general nature andcurrent realities of the global organizationalcontext can workers begin to appreciate thepossible roles, the weaknesses or imposed limi-tations, the organizational decision-makingprocesses, and so on to the point where they canbe realistic in their expectations and controlledin their reactions.

It is vital for many reasons, a few of which wehave highlighted, that international social work-ers understand the nature of the global organi-zational context within which they operate andon which they will often be dependent.

The Ideological Context

The term “ideology” has been defined as “sys-tems of thought and belief by which individualsand groups explain how their social systemoperates and what principles it exemplifies”(Gilpin, 1987, p. 25). Ideologies are essentially“intellectual commitments or acts of faith”(Gilpin, p. 4). The importance of ideologies isreflected in the existence throughout world his-tory of religious and cultural systems, politicaland related social systems, economic systemsand so on, all based on ideology. One criticalissue that arises is how these differing systemscoexist on the world stage. Do they tend to existside by side in peace, compete with each other,or seek to dominate others? History would seemto demonstrate that, at any point of time, arange of ideologies or worldviews coexist andcompete with each other with varying degrees ofaggression involved. Because of this, there arethose who present the global ideological contextas a pervasive clash between competing ideolo-gies or civilizations. Two examples of such writ-ers are Huntington (2002) and Gilpin (1987).(See also Sachs, 2002.) Huntington’s theme isthat “human history is the history of civiliza-tions” (p. 10) that are inevitably clashingwith each other. Not surprisingly, the title of hiswell-known but highly controversial book is TheClash of Civilizations. Gilpin, by contrast, by



contrast, presents a model based on conflictbetween ideologies. He argues that three com-peting ideologies of political economy havedivided humanity since the 1800s. The threeideologies are liberalism, nationalism, andMarxism (see Table 3.1), of which he writes,

These three ideologies are fundamentallydifferent in their conceptions of the relation-ships among society, state and market, and itmay not be an exaggeration to say that everycontroversy in the field of international polit-ical economy is ultimately reducible to differ-ing conceptions of these relationships. Theintellectual clash is not merely of historicinterest. Economic liberalism, Marxism, andeconomic nationalism are all very much aliveat the end of the twentieth century. (Gilpin,1987, p. 25).

Other commentators on recent world history,who follow this basic type of approach to ideol-ogy, are those who focus on the rift between theideology of “triumphant economic—and politi-cal—capitalist liberalism,” as it had developed inthe Western world, and the “New World” thatthe West set out to dominate (Hobsbaum, 1995,p. 201). This is a view shared by Worsley (1984)and Hoogvelt (2001, pp. 18–21). The tendencyto divide the world into largely irreconcilablecamps has long been evident and is still withus, exemplified in, for example, ongoing percep-tions of the differences between East and Westor Islam and the Judeo-Christian tradition.

All of the above schools of thought are exam-ples of schools that see differing ideologies ascoexisting but inherently in conflict to somedegree. This is usually because of some elementwithin each ideology that encourages its followers


Impact

Social, economic, and politicalconditions seem to improve

Increasing inequalityWeak distribution of resources

which concentrates them inhands of a few

Security and belongingness Strong and weak nationsColonization and exploitationSanctions, conflict, and war

Progress towards equalityBetter distribution of resourcesA strong centerHigh initial growth

accompanied by stagnationDeclining impact on states.

Thoughts and Beliefs

LibertyFreedomRationalityIndividualismFree marketPrivate property

State-buildingIndependenceDefenseSovereigntyGeographic location

Class struggleClassless societyCommon ownership of

means of productionLiberation for all

people

Actions

DemocracyMinimum, but active

state interventionCompetitionIndependenceChoiceCapital formationColonization

Political autonomyIndustrializationMilitary powerEconomic self-sufficiencyProtection

Change through struggleSocialist/communist forms

of governmentAnalyze and critique

capitalist structures andactions

Ideology

Liberalism

Nationalism

MarxismCommunism

Table 3.1 Summary of the three ideologies


to proselytize or seek to subjugate competingideologies.

A second type of school focuses on particularideological trends which are in themselves, inthe view of these schools, a danger to the globalcommunity. Adherents of these schools thenseek to counteract these trends by promot-ing alternative ideologies. For example, manywriters and activists have focused on the strongantifemale trend often found in religious, polit-ical, economic, cultural, and social systems, andhave sought to counter this through the promo-tion of feminism. Others have identified the ten-dency in many ideologies and systems to havescant regard for the natural environment, andhave sought to counter this trend through thepromotion of green ideologies. Both feministand green ideologies are widely espoused, ingeneral terms, by a wide range of workers in theinternational field. This is because each of theseideologies is seen as having vital implications forhuman well-being.

A third aspect of the current ideological con-text that calls for attention is characterized byeither opposition to, or major doubts concerning,various existing dominant ideologies. For themost part, however, this type of opposition orconcern has not resulted in opposing ideologiesin any full sense, but rather in protests against,and widely expressed opposition to, these ideolo-gies. Well-known ideological movements of thiskind include anticapitalism, antiglobalization,anti–free trade, and anti–transnational corpora-tions. Supporters of these views, a very variedcamp, have sought to disrupt many internationalgatherings in recent years and received consider-able media coverage. Many books have also beenpublished reflecting such concerns, as can be seenfrom titles such as Chua’s World on Fire: HowExporting Free Market Democracy Breeds EthnicHatred and Global Instability (2003).

A fourth and very important type of globalideological thinking focuses not so much oncriticizing existing ideologies as on highlighting

what might be, and so promoting a particularideology. Examples of such ideologies arehumanitarianism, a focus on human rights, andvarious religious ideologies. The promotion ofsuch ideologies usually emanates from a combi-nation of a concern for some existing state ofaffairs and a belief in the efficacy of bringing aparticular ideologically based approach to bearwhen addressing that state of affairs. The expres-sion of these ideologies is, therefore, found notso much in protest movements as in the activeengagement in the field at all levels of ideologi-cally based agencies, religious and secular innature.

From the above discussion, it can be seen thatideology can and does play significant roles inunderstanding the overall legacy of history, inanalyzing existing socioeconomic-political situa-tions and trends, and in developing interventionstrategies.

The Significance of a HistoricalPerspective of Ideology

While the study of many areas of history hasthe potential to assist our understanding of thecontemporary global context, we shall confineour comments here to the widely acknowledgedsignificance of the history of capitalist expan-sion emanating from Europe as early as thefifteenth and sixteenth centuries. This history, asHoogvelt perceives it, encompasses

the period of mercantilism of 1500–1800—that is, “the striving after political powerthrough economic means” (p. 3);

the period of colonialism, 1800–1950, impor-tant in Hoogvelt’s eyes because of its “legacyof the international division of labour, ofresource bondage and the westernisation ofthe peripheral elites” (p. 26);

the period of neocolonial and imperialism,1950–1970—a period of “unequal exchange



between the rich and poor worlds . . .mediated by neocolonial class alliancesbetween international capital and third worldbourgeoisies” (p. 47); and

the postimperial era from 1970 on, which sawa “transfer of economic surplus through debtpeonage” (p. 17). (see also Potter, 1992.)

Whatever the details, this general pattern ofwestern dominance is generally accepted, and iswidely regarded as highly relevant to recentdevelopments.

It is not therefore, in this context, the detailsof the history of capitalist expansion that areimportant. They can readily be found inHoogvelt (2001) and elsewhere. Rather it is thewidely accepted conclusion that the ideologiesof mercantilism, colonialism, imperialism, andmodernization have left their mark on all of thecountries directly involved, and most others,and have resulted in modern systems that reflectthese historical events and contemporary reali-ties that still bear the mark of this historicallegacy. For example, in his well-known text ondevelopment, Black (1991) assumes throughoutthat the former colonial powers, now neocolo-nial powers, are as able today to control tradearrangements and to exploit tribal and ethnicanimosities as they were during the colonialperiod.

Furthermore, the reality that the liberalizingelites in most former colonies—who achievedindependence and guided postindependencedevelopment—were themselves strongly west-ern in orientation contributed to this outcome(see, e.g., Hobsbaum, 1995). A further impor-tant factor contributing to the recent situationhas been western control of the establishmentand policies of the global economic institutionsset out after World War II. Indeed, the history ofcapitalist expansion, and especially colonialism,has left its mark on the world in a whole rangeof ways, including through the imposition ofarbitrary state boundaries, especially in Africa,by colonial powers; through western-engineered

state demographic profiles, as in Malaysia andFiji; through western-influenced state politicalsystems, introduced before conditions wereconducive (e.g., in Papua New Guinea); andthrough the formation of western-style statewelfare systems (see Chapter 1). These are butsome of the important aspects of the coloniallegacy. It is a legacy of which many of the generalpublic in developing countries are stronglyaware.

Economic Neoliberalismand its NeoconservativeWing—the New Right

Of the ideologies that have made up theglobal ideological context in recent times, noneis more important than the ideological trendknown by various names but which we shall referto as economic neoliberalism. It is a highly contro-versial ideology, having a wide range of support-ers, including many highly influential leadersand scholars, but also many critics, some ofwhom regard it as the most significant factoradversely influencing the well-being of a highproportion of the world’s population. Some seethis ideological development as a return to his-torical liberal capitalism, and some present it asthe heritage of the “New Right” political forces,“a mixture of economic liberalism and renascentconservatism” (Pierson, 1998, p. 39) espoused byMargaret Thatcher (prime minister of the UnitedKingdom, 1979–1990) and Ronald Reagan (pres-ident of the United States, 1981–1988). Evenmore significantly, however, many see economicneoliberalism as the ideology underpinning, inparticular, the work of the World Bank and IMFin terms of, for example, their structural adjust-ment packages (e.g., Randall and Theobald,1998, pp. 160–61); the focus of the WTO and ofmany western states on free trade (e.g., Naderet al., 1993); the international movement ofcapital generally (Korten, 1995, pp. 79ff.); andthe pursuit of policies designed to enhance eco-nomic growth at the expense of virtually all other



economic and social concerns (e.g., Hutton,2003; Hamilton, 2003).

Indeed, some commentators speak as if eco-nomic neoliberalism is at the heart of most ofour global problems, although as Hoogvelt(2001, p. 187) and others point out, the precisenature of any causal link is difficult to detect.The fundamental issue, perhaps, concerns thequestion of the distribution of decision-makingpower, nationally and globally. Korten (1995,p. 86) comments that, at its core, this ideologyis “not about the public interest” but “aboutdefending and institutionalizing the right ofthe economically powerful to do whatever bestserves their immediate interests without publicaccountability for the consequences.” This seemsto be a fairly widely held view in many quartersof the international field.

What are the key elements of this ideology ofeconomic neoliberalism? Among the elementsmost commonly referred to are

• freeing up of the economy by essentiallyminimizing government interference—deregulation;

• maximizing trade potential by institutinga free trade regime—free of governmentsubsidies and import-export controls;

• limiting or rolling back state power, inpart by devolving more responsibility tocommunities, families, and individuals;

• placing a strong emphasis on individual-ism—often linked to private property,consumption; and the pursuit of entrepre-neurialism; and

• a negative view of the welfare state asuneconomic, unproductive, inefficient,and a denial of freedom.

However, we need to be aware that discrepan-cies between what an ideology suggests andwhat a viable political economy permits arecommon, and that this ideology is seldomimposed as rigidly as it is sometimes presentedor in a uniform manner.

International Social Work andthe Ideological Context

It should be clear to readers that an under-standing of the global ideological context,from both a historical and a contemporary per-spective, is an important aspect of internationalsocial work. It is difficult to see how most situa-tions could be analyzed, and therefore under-stood and responded to, without addressing thisaspect of the global context. Let us develop thisgeneral conclusion a little further by focusing onthree ways in which the global ideological con-text might be relevant to international socialwork.

The Worker’s Own Ideological Position

No worker will enter the international fieldwithout some ideological baggage, whetherrelated to general cultural background andupbringing or to specific experiences in thefield. Indeed, many social workers enteringinternational social work do so, from our expe-rience, as a result of strong ideological motiva-tion. Sometimes this motivation emanates fromthe worker’s background, as with religious moti-vation; sometimes it comes from internationalexperiences resulting in a desire to work towardsachieving human rights and social justice orhumanitarian goals; and sometimes it is a resultof participation in a particular social movementpossessing strong ideology, such as green orfeminist movements.

Often strong ideological motivation drivesthe workers’ degree of commitment, protectsthem against frustrations and disappointments,and provides them with strong support net-works. If there is a negative aspect to this situa-tion, however, it is the danger that workers whoare strongly driven ideologically will find it dif-ficult to be objective in their approach, or openand insightful in coming to an understanding ofsituations seemingly at variance with their ideo-logical stance. There is a general cross-cultural



issue involved here, and a considerable literatureaddresses this issue. In addition, we need to beaware of workers’ often strong reactions to situ-ations that for them are ideologically unaccept-able, but to which, in reality terms, they have todemonstrate an objective approach and bringabout, if possible, an outcome acceptable to allrelevant parties. The question is whether mostworkers find it easy to make the necessarycompromises.

Local People’sPerceptions of Western Ideology

While they may not express it in ideologicalterms, many people in developing countries willhave strong emotional reactions to the West, itsagencies, and its personnel. The prevailing emo-tion may be anger, suspicion, or hatred, reflect-ing frustration that is related to perceptions ofWestern behavior in the distant past or in recenttimes. Emotions may be so strong that certainlines of action may be effectively closed to work-ers, or they may spill over into an inability toeven accept workers with western connections,or they may be so strong that any forward move-ment at all might be deemed impossible. In anyevent, an awareness of the possibility of ideolog-ical reactions and an ability to analyze theirnature and causes are crucial to intervention.Chua’s 2003 text is a good example of thisphenomenon, although at the macro level.

Workers’ Reactions to RelevantInstitutional Ideologies

It is not at all uncommon for workers ininternational social work to find themselvesworking in or for, or having to collaborate with,agencies or institutions possessing dominantideologies to which they personally are inher-ently opposed. Seldom do all personnel in anyagency reflect even similar ideologies amongthemselves, let alone the same ideology as theagency has endorsed at some formal level. Faced

with potentially conflicting ideological views,what are appropriate reactions? Should theworker withdraw, seek to change the organiza-tion’s ideology from within, or accept the reali-ties of ideological pluralism and develop anability to work within such a situation? Thedecision will be an individual one, reflecting arange of considerations, and any of the abovedecisions may be thought appropriate. What isinappropriate is that workers fail to acknowl-edge the potential for tension or conflict, andcarry on working regardless; for when thisoccurs, events may overtake decision-makingand leave the worker with few satisfactoryoptions for resolving complex and difficultsituations.

The Emerging PolicyContext: The Emergence ofGlobal Social and EconomicPolicy and of InternationalLaw, and the Significanceof These for InternationalSocial Work Practice

While certainly the world is still a long wayfrom functioning under a set of universal orglobal policies, ideologies, principles, and laws,there are many signs of the world moving in thisgeneral direction, no matter how slow, uneven,uncertain, and precarious the steps being taken.The subject is complex, but let us share ourunderstanding of the current state of develop-ments and encourage the reader to reflect on thepotential significance for international socialwork of what seems to be occurring.

International Law

Let us commence with international law.There seems to be no doubt that, as Robertson(2000, p. 90) puts it: “for the present, interna-tional law comes courtesy of nation states if it



comes at all.” International law is not legislatedby a parliament of nations with authority todo so but by a “hopelessly unrepresentative”General Assembly (GA) of the UN; while theInternational Court of Justice in The Hague “isnot permitted to become a Supreme Court forHumankind” (Robertson). Yet nonbindingresolutions of the GA do sometimes influencenations, while “customary international law”does at times “filter through into national law”(pp. 91–92). As Robertson points out,

Some common law systems, including theBritish and American, accept customaryinternational law as part of that common law,although treaties must be incorporated byspecific legislation before they can have anydirect legal effects. [However,] at the begin-ning of the twenty-first century, internationallaw remains subordinate and subservient tostate power, which tends to favour economic,political or military interests whenever theyconflict with those of justice. [Yet] abusiveexercising of state power is becoming harderto hide and easier to condemn and the legaltheory that human rights can be subjugatedto ‘state rights’ is becoming recognized as adangerous fiction. (pp. 91–92)

Social workers need to be aware of the grad-ual development of a body of international law,of the need for states to endorse it and incorpo-rate it into state law, and of their role as socialworkers to seek to influence this last process.

Global Economic Policy

Global economic policy presents a differentsituation. The existence of a global economy isnot disputed; nor is it disputed that, as a conse-quence of the operations of the global economy,“it is less and less possible for individual statesto regulate the economic activity that goes onwithin and across their borders” (Pierson, 1998,p. 64; see also Randall and Theobald, 1998,

p. 253). The key issue, however, is the degree towhich global economic policy is a reality, deter-mined by global organizations and institutionsrelatively independent of states. Randall andTheobald (1998, p. 253) write,

Capital flows and investment decisions, fiscaland even monetary policy are increasinglydetermined by the actions of internationalbanks, commodity brokers, currency specu-lators, market makers and the like. Debtornations must submit themselves to policiesand programmes imposed by the IFIs [Inter-national Financial Institutions].

The prevailing reality would appear to be adegree of tension between state and global eco-nomic policies, with a variety of scenarios. Somestates appear to be supporting, or even driving,global economic policy, while not always adher-ing to those economic policies in their ownbehavior. Other states appear to be subjugatedto global economic policy, and, on the basis ofsome criteria, to be suffering accordingly. Otherstates again, however, remain reasonably suc-cessful in ignoring global economic policy andpursuing a largely state-determined economicpath. In essence, then, the relationship betweenglobal and state economic policy differs fromthat pertaining to international law only in thatthe powers behind global economic policy arefar more powerful than those behind interna-tional law—and certainly even less accountableto the people or to many states.

Global Social Policy

Over the last few decades, the focus in inter-national social work has been mainly on com-parative social policy and the emergence of socialpolicy in developing countries. (See, for example,MacPherson and Midgley, 1987.) While thatremains important, here we are more concernedwith global social policy. In the first chapter ofhis text on global social policy, Deacon (1997)



includes within the term the “globalization ofsocial policy instruments, policy and provision”(p. 2), all viewed as in their early stages ofdevelopment, and “the socialization of globalpolitics”—“In other words the major agendaissues at intergovernmental meetings are now inessence social (and environmental) questions”(p. 3). Regarding the extent of the developmentof global social policy, Deacon writes,

Social policy as an academic discipline or fieldof study has, we suggest, been rather slowerto wake up to the impact of the new world(dis)order on its subject matter than someeconomists, political scientists, internationalrelations students and sociologists. On theother hand, because of its commitment towelfare and the concern of its practitioners tonot only analyse existing policy but prescribebetter ways in which human needs might bearticulated and met, its potential contributionto the new global politics is immense. (p. 8)

Deacon agrees with Townsend and Donkor(1995, p. 20) that

the problems in the late twentieth century ofthe international market and the replacementof sovereignty and empire by internationalhierarchical power will demand the establish-ment of forms of an international welfarestate.

However, while setting out the pressures forthe globalization of social policy, Deacon warns,

National and regional self-interest and pro-tectionism are alternative strategies availableto governments. Supranationalization can beresisted. (p. 14)

Emerging Global Policy andInternational Social Work

While it is clear that developments in all threeareas of policy covered are to some degree or in

some regards in their infancy, it is also clearthat those developments that have occurred arealready having an impact on world affairs anddevelopment. Robertson is convinced that cus-tomary international law is working to protecthuman rights, although much more needs to bedone; while Deacon is convinced that globalsocial policy, as manifested by developmentswithin regional bodies such as the EuropeanUnion and by the field of international economicand social development, is already opening uppossibilities such as global policies, global taxa-tion and redistribution of monies, and globalprovision for the welfare needs of populationssuch as refugees. Furthermore, the global agree-ment relating to welfare goals and agendas in arange of areas augurs well for the future. How fardevelopments in global economic policy haveproved beneficial to the world’s people is a morecontentious issue, but undoubtedly much goodhas been achieved and there is still much morepotential for good. The key element lacking herewould appear to be the incorporation of the leastdeveloped countries within a more equitableglobal economic order.

The significance of these developments forinternational social work practice is readily per-ceived. In the first place, they together constitutea policy context of which workers need to beaware as they seek to understand and respond tosituations of any kind. In the second place, thepolicy context contains much potential for good,and international social workers need to be awareof the responsibility they carry to contribute to itsappropriate and effective ongoing development.However, the significance of global policy doesnot detract from the continuing significance ofnational policy regimes, and international socialworkers will frequently find themselves seekingto balance and handle these two competingdemands. When operating internationally, theimportance of and inherent difficulty in graspingthe intricacies of perhaps several sets of nationalpolicy, the interaction between these, and theirrelationship to emerging global policy will fre-quently confront workers, calling for a firm grasp



of the policy field generally and of a large body ofdetailed knowledge, relating to the national andinternational levels, in specific fields of practice.

With the social work profession havingincreasingly found its place in the policy arena inrecent years at the national level, it follows thatthe profession will be seeking to participate inpolicy concerns at the global level. Indeed, socialwork practitioners in some obvious contextshave long been aware of global policy needs andrealities: for example, social workers in inter-country casework, intercountry adoption, otherareas of child welfare such as custody disputesacross borders, and in the corrections field havelong possessed some kind of focus on globalsocial policy. At another level, social workersengaged in such fields as poverty alleviation,unemployment, and local-level developmenthave often been very aware of how global eco-nomic policy was impacting on the local situa-tion. Finally, social workers who have specializedin human rights work, work with indigenousminorities, ecological concerns, and a range ofother areas have either utilized internationallaw and conventions as a vehicle for pursuingnational or local change, or have contributed tothe expansion of policy at the international level.

If the importance of global social and eco-nomic policy to social work has already been wellestablished, there is little doubt that it will grow inimportance in future years. High levels of inter-national population mobility, various types ofcollaborative arrangements between states, globalcollaboration in responding to needs, and theongoing process of globalization generally willall continue to possess a policy dimension, andprobably on an increasing level. Internationalsocial workers need to be aware of these processesand ready to play their part in ensuring that thepolicies that do emerge are in the best interests ofhuman well-being, and not just of states and cor-porations, and especially of the more vulnerableof the world’s people whose voice is often notheard at decision-making levels.

However, it is also important that, as globalpolicies do evolve, international social workers

especially, but increasingly all social workers, arefamiliar with them and aware of their relevanceto their practice. Often it is social workers whowill carry the responsibility of making individu-als and groups aware of the global policies thatmight affect their situations, and who will facil-itate their ability to interact with those policiesand the agencies that administer them. This is,of course, already the situation in some areas ofpractice, as noted above, but the range of areasof practice to which global policies will apply islikely to expand.

In other words, just as social workers havealways needed to possess a knowledge andunderstanding of national legal and policyregimes, so in an era of rapid globalization dothey also need to be aware of global regimes.

Conclusion

The context of international social work is vastand complex, yet highly fascinating. More andmore professionals, from a wide range of disci-plines and countries, have moved into inter-national work. They find a niche within thatcomplex of international organizations, havingfrequently to interact with some or all of the sec-tors involved, and therefore needing to developsome basic understanding of the network ofglobal organizations and how they function.Their work will see them focusing in often a rela-tively limited field, but almost invariably they areconscious of the impact on their field of a rangeof other fields, issues, and social problems. Manyfind themselves obliged to improve their cross-disciplinary abilities, as they wrestle with highlycomplex situations that are often underresourcedin personnel and other terms. Increasingly too,workers encounter an ever growing array of inter-national laws, conventions, and policies, some ofwhich relate directly to what they are seeking toachieve. To understand this legal and policy con-text is not easy for most workers, but not tounderstand it, or have access to those who do, canoften result in unfortunate outcomes. Finally, one



is aware also of the existence of dominating orcompeting ideologies, and of the need at the veryminimum to appreciate these as one aspect ofone’s operating reality.

While the above is true for all who enter theinternational field, for social workers and othermembers of the helping professions the focusrequired will be on specific elements of each of

these four aspects of the international context.This should become clearer to readers as weconsider various aspects of the field of interna-tional social work in subsequent chapters. Atthis point, however, we would hope that readerswill have a basic understanding of these fouraspects of the international context that havebeen discussed.


• It is important to have a clear understanding of the global context of international socialwork, and this context has been presented in terms of four dimensions: global social prob-lems, global organizations, ideologies of global relevance, and global policy frameworks.

• A clear understanding of global social problems is necessary as these problems influenceactions and resource allocations of national and international agencies. Such an under-standing also helps social workers to analyze and relate to local situations and contribute tolocal and global policies.

• The organizational context for international social work is very vast and complex. The rootsof the beginning of international organizations may be traced to the consequences of the twoworld wars. One way of understanding the overall organizational context is by looking at thenational governments’ agencies which serve international purposes, at intergovernmentalagencies such as the European Union and African Union, at the UN system, and at sometransnational corporations, INGOs, and global civil society. This understanding significantlyhelps social workers to contribute to international social work.

• Many countries have been strongly influenced by, if not the victims of, prevailing ideologies.Liberalism, colonialism, nationalism, Marxism, imperialism, and neocolonialism have allhad an influence on the development of various nation-states and international develop-ments. However, liberalism, in its many forms including neoliberalism, appears to have beenthe dominant ideology, although there have emerged strong ideologies opposing it. Anunderstanding of these ideologies is an important part of the preparation for internationalsocial work.

• The global policy context is composed of international law, economic policy, and socialpolicy, although social policy developments particularly are in their early stages. However,understanding such emerging policies is necessary for international social work practice.

Summary



• After reading this chapter, what do you consider to be the main aspects of the global contextof international social work?

• According to you, what are the main global social problems? Of these, choose a social prob-lem of your interest, and discuss it in light of the four questions (nos. 2–5) posed in theglobal social problems context section.

• Why do you think social workers need to be aware of global social problems?

• Discuss the broad organizational context for international social work.

• Study any of the following organizations that interest you and identify roles for socialworkers:

– A national government’s agency established for international work.

– An intergovernmental agency or regional association.

– A UN agency, e.g.,. UNICEF, UNDP, etc.

– An INGO.

• With the class divided into small groups, let each group consider the nature, strengths, weak-nesses, and potential of one of the six categories of international organizations discussed andpresent their conclusions to the class.

• How can better coordination and cooperation be developed among internationalorganizations?

• According to you, what are the most dominant ideologies in the contemporary world?Consider the merits of opposing ideologies to these dominant ideologies.

• Why is it important to understand these ideologies for international social work practice?

• Assume that, as an international social work practitioner, you are going to work in a specificfield in a particular country. Discuss global and state policies possibly relevant to the chosenfield and country.

• As an international social work practitioner, what aspects of the global context should bekept in mind for your practice?

Questions and Topics for Discussion

• Undertake a systematic analysis of any global social problem according to the four questions(nos. 2–5) posed under the global social problems context section.

• Undertake an analysis of a particular issue according to the four dimensions of the globalcontext presented in this chapter.

• Examine the current level of coordination and cooperation (or lack of it) among the sixcategories of organizations in a country as a case study.

• Study the issues in implementing international law and global policies at the national level.

• Study what constitutes the global context of international social work in a selected situation.

• Undertake a study of how the organizational context matters in international social work bysurveying social workers working in international organizations.

Possible Areas for Research Projects



Further Reading

Deacon, B. (1997). Global social policy: International organizations and the future of welfare. London:

Sage.

Gordon, W. (1994). The United Nations at the crossroads of reform. New York: M. E. Sharpe.

Hoogvelt, A. (2001). Globalisation and the post-colonial world: The new political economy of development.

Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kaldor, M. (2003). Global civil society: An answer to war. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.


Documents

The Global Context of International Social Work...chapter four dimensions of the global context, namely the social problem, organizational, ideo-logical, and policy dimensions. While