 |
La Regle du Jeu: France and the Paradox of Managed Globalization
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
2
Est maître des lieux celui qui les organise. (He who organizes is mater of the arena.)
—Jean de la Fontaine
The world economy is at once liberalized and bureaucratized. Goods, services,
and capital flow quite freely, particularly in historical perspective. And yet the markets for those goods are built upon institutional foundations, including the myriad formal rules and codes that oblige governments around the world to embrace and maintain their openness. This paper is about how two distinct processes that made globalization. The story of liberalization is well known, but the bureaucratization, an essential foundation of truly global markets, is largely unknown in the United States and deeply misunderstood within Europe.
The United States and United Kingdom embraced ad hoc globalization during the
early 1960s. U.S. and U.K. policy makers liberalized trade in goods and flows of capital and thereby began the process of internationalizing markets again, the first era of internationalization having ended during the interwar years. At various moments U.S. and U.K. policy makers embraced unilateral action, bilateral pressure, and even multilateral negotiations. The process of economic internationalization was not, however, to be managed by powerful international organizations or governed by codified, firm rules.
European policy makers, led by the French, conceived a different process of
globalization, one governed by capacious international organizations and filled with rules that both enable and constrain policy makers. By the end of the 1990s, Pascal Lamy, the current head of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and for twenty years a powerful figure in French and European bureaucratic politics, had dubbed the emergent doctrine mondialisation maîtrisée, or “managed globalization.”
1
Variants have included
the phrases “harnessed globalization” and “globalization by the rules.” As policy doctrine, managed globalization demanded that rules for globalization be written and obeyed, jurisdictions of international organizations be extended, and the powers of the organizations themselves enhanced. For more than twenty years European policy makers have, often successfully, sought to codify the rules of globalization and
1
See Philip H. Gordon and Sophie Meunier, The French Challenge: Adapting to Globalization
(Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 2001), p. 98 ff. For more on the French intellectual ambivalence about, but practical embrace of, globalization, see Sophie Meunier, “France’s Double‐Talk on Globalization,” French Politics, Culture, and Society, vol. 21, no. 1 (2003), pp.20‐34; Meunier, “Free‐Falling France or Free‐Trading France?” French Politics, Culture, and Society, vol. 22, no. 1 (2004), pp. 98‐107; and Meunier, “Globalization and Europeanization; A Challenge for France,” French Politics, vol. 2, no. 2 (2004), pp. 125‐150. Also see Pascal Lamy, La démocratie‐monde: Pour une autre gouvernance globale (Paris: Seuil et La République des Idées, 2004).
|
| | Authors: Abdelal, Rawi. and Meunier, Sophie. |
|
| |
|
|
2
Est maître des lieux celui qui les organise. (He who organizes is mater of the arena.)
—Jean de la Fontaine
The world economy is at once liberalized and bureaucratized. Goods, services,
and capital flow quite freely, particularly in historical perspective. And yet the markets
for those goods are built upon institutional foundations, including the myriad formal
rules and codes that oblige governments around the world to embrace and maintain
their openness. This paper is about how two distinct processes that made globalization.
The story of liberalization is well known, but the bureaucratization, an essential
foundation of truly global markets, is largely unknown in the United States and deeply
misunderstood within Europe.
The United States and United Kingdom embraced ad hoc globalization during the
early 1960s. U.S. and U.K. policy makers liberalized trade in goods and flows of capital
and thereby began the process of internationalizing markets again, the first era of
internationalization having ended during the interwar years. At various moments U.S.
and U.K. policy makers embraced unilateral action, bilateral pressure, and even
multilateral negotiations. The process of economic internationalization was not,
however, to be managed by powerful international organizations or governed by
codified, firm rules.
European policy makers, led by the French, conceived a different process of
globalization, one governed by capacious international organizations and filled with
rules that both enable and constrain policy makers. By the end of the 1990s, Pascal
Lamy, the current head of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and for twenty years a
powerful figure in French and European bureaucratic politics, had dubbed the emergent
doctrine mondialisation maîtrisée, or “managed globalization.”
1
Variants have included
the phrases “harnessed globalization” and “globalization by the rules.” As policy
doctrine, managed globalization demanded that rules for globalization be written and
obeyed, jurisdictions of international organizations be extended, and the powers of the
organizations themselves enhanced. For more than twenty years European policy
makers have, often successfully, sought to codify the rules of globalization and
1
See Philip H. Gordon and Sophie Meunier, The French Challenge: Adapting to Globalization
(Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 2001), p. 98 ff. For more on the French intellectual ambivalence
about, but practical embrace of, globalization, see Sophie Meunier, “France’s Double‐Talk on
Globalization,” French Politics, Culture, and Society, vol. 21, no. 1 (2003), pp.20‐34; Meunier, “Free‐
Falling France or Free‐Trading France?” French Politics, Culture, and Society, vol. 22, no. 1 (2004),
pp. 98‐107; and Meunier, “Globalization and Europeanization; A Challenge for France,” French
Politics, vol. 2, no. 2 (2004), pp. 125‐150. Also see Pascal Lamy, La démocratie‐monde: Pour une autre
gouvernance globale (Paris: Seuil et La République des Idées, 2004).
|
|
 Convention | | All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
