Saturday, November 18, 2017

GLOCALIZATION: No one Left Behind

Abstract
First, this paper introduces that globalization is beyond geography and economy as it covers various aspects.  Existence of supranational institutions is evidence of globalization in public policy making. UN produces Sustainable Development Goals that need to be integrated into national policy making, which signifying the globalization of public policies. Nugroho is questioning whether Indonesia policy-making should be SDGs-driven or Nawa Cita-driven without addressing the No One Left Behind notion of SDGs. Next, this paper proposes ‘glocalization’ as the framework of thinking. The early glocalization concepts receive criticism in which they don’t address the issues of power and the ability of agency to make difference. Then, this paper presents theories addressing those issues and related study cases wherein glocalization is practiced in the public policy planning process in Indonesia in its effort to adapt the Sustainable Development Goals into its National and Regional Action Plans and to address the notion of No One Left Behind of the SDGs. As a conclusion, ‘glocalization’ needs to be the framework of thinking, specifically in the making of public policies, wherein aspects of globalization are given pathway.

Keywords: globalization, glocalization, Indonesian public policy, power, adaptation

Background

Globalization is Beyond Economy and Geography
The word ‘globalization’ implicates geographical and economic framework of thoughts as presented in a couple of literatures[1]. D’Ercole writes in his OECD report (2003) that globalization; which is understood as “the growing integration of national economies through trade, technology, labor and capital flows; is a key feature of today’s economic life”. Having said that, he argues that globalization is not just an economic phenomenon, “it has cultural, social and environmental dimensions” that bring people together more closely. Similarly, Zollinger states that globalization is “a process of increasing international integration in all fields[2] (economy, politics, culture, environment, communications, etc.)” (Zollinger, 2007: 1). Amongst evidences[3] of globalization is the existence of supranational institutions[4] to facilitate international agreement. In 2012, United Nations came up with global goals called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to replace the Millennium Development Goals/MDGs. SDGs signifies the globalization of public policies, which will give pathway for dimensions, fields and aspects[5] addressed by D’Ercole, Zollinger and IMF.

SDGs Driven vs. Nawa Cita Driven Policy Making
Nugroho raises a question whether it is possible to synergize the global development missions with Indonesian development missions (2016: 1) and identifies that out of 17 Sustainable Development Goals, Nawa Citas are aligned and congruent with SDGs no 1 – 9. He later came up with an issue of pro SDGs development policy-making in the relative parallels and dissonance between SDGs and Nawa Cita and proposes 3 (three) possible solutions. First, SDGs should be seen merely as performance criteria to be fit-and-matched with the achievements made out of the implementations of Nawa Cita. Secondly, Indonesian government shifts its Nawa Cita policy to SDGs policy and lastly, Indonesian government to integrate the key result areas into Nawa Cita. The solutions proposed by Nugroho lay on the question of whether Indonesian policy-making is SDGs-driven or Nawa Cita-driven without addressing the No One Left Behind[6] notion of SDGs.

Thesis Statement 
The Need for Glocalization in Policy Making
This paper will discuss why glocalization, instead of globalization, should be the framework of thinking in policy making to address the phenomenon of globalization in any aspect. The study cases to support this thesis are events in which I personally was involved. Those are the program planning process facilitated by BAPPENAS[7] and the local-realities-based program planning facilitated by Indonesia SDGs Secretariat and community service organizations to address various goals in SDGs.

Discussion 
Limitation of Discussion
This paper analyzes the adaptation of SDGs, as a product made by supranational institution, in the public policy making in Indonesia. Analyzes are based on the study cases presented related to policy-making events both facilitated by government institution and jointly facilitated by government institution and community service organizations.

Glocalization
Roudometof (2015: 1) informed that “to date, there is no glocalization theory or theories as such in spite of the growing popularity of ‘the glocal’”. Roudometof tried to theorizing ‘glocalization’ by comparing (: 12) glocalizations offered by Robertson and Ritzer. He concluded that Robertson and Ritzer interpretation of glocalization do not address the issues of power (Robertson) and the ability of agency to make difference (Ritzer). Roudometof thinks that “In Robertson’s framework, globalization is ultimately transformed into glocalization, whereas in Ritzer’s framework, glocalization is ultimately seen as a facet of globalization – as the way in which global capitalism incorporates the local”.
Faulconbridge and Beaverstock study finds that “globalization is not just about economy, international trade and employment” (Clifford et.al, 2008: 340) and summarize that globalization has impacted aspects of life from cultural to political. Faulconbridge and Beaverstock (Clifford et.al, 2008: 332) present the term of ‘glocalization’ used by Swyngendouw in describing globalization. He says that “globalization is actually a local-global or ‘glocalization’ process, in which instead of focusing solely upon the global as a scale, we also need to recognize the interconnections between different scales (local, regional, national and global) and how these make up the process of globalization”. Meanwhile CERFE sees glocalization as “a strategy involving substantial reform of the different aspects of globalization” with the goal being both to establish a link between the benefits of the global dimension - … -, while at the same time, establishing a bottom-up system for the governance globalization” ((2003: 13-14).
Bottom-up approach talks about 2 (two) levels of policy implementation, namely macro-implementation level and micro-implementation level. Berman suggests that “at the macro-implementation level, centrally located actors devise a government program; at the micro-implementation level, local organizations react to the macro-level plans, develop their own programs, and implement them” (Leidi, 2011: 8). The No One Left Behind notion of SDGs refers to the need to include everyone in societal processes, and conveys the notion that people should not only be allowed to thrive, but should have a voice and effective opportunities to shape the course of development (Trusteeship Chamber, 2016).

Glocalization in Policy Making
BAPPENAS applies bottom-up approach in its preparation of the Pro SDGs national development programs planning based on the President Regulation No. 59 Year 2017 on SDGs Implementation. This regulation mandates that National Action Plans[8] need to be prepared before being adapted in the Regional Action Plans[9] (RAP) (BAPPENAS, personal communication, 2 November 2017). The word ‘adapted’ that I use is to translate the point in the regulation in which Regional Action Plans may directly or indirectly support the achievements of SDGs (p. 3). The study case as an example for the argument above is a program identification and planning meeting that I was involved in. This meeting was specifically discussing SDGs Goal 13[10], Climate Action. Based on the various inputs from each participant of the meeting, this meeting concluded that goal 13.a[11] and 13.b[12] were not relevant for Indonesia, indicator for 13.2.1[13] was not relevant for Indonesia, local initiatives were not yet facilitated in the program planning, and indicators should have been made as flexible as possible based on the data to be collected from Ministers and/or government institutions. A follow-up meeting was planned to be conducted involving more stakeholders to address the No One Left Behind notion.
No One Left Behind notion is address in the president regulation, which mandates that the preparation of RAP involves community service organizations, philanthropies, business actors, scholars and other related stakeholders (Article 15). An example of this point is not available yet as preparation of RAP would be done soon after NAP is finalized. However, I would like to present a study case of an event that I was involved in conducted jointly between the government and community social services. This event was called Workshop of National and Regional Action Plans and Road Map of SDGs facilitated by an alliance called Partners for Resilience – Strategic Partnership (PfR-SP[14]) together with SDGs Secretariat of BAPPENAS. This workshop is meant to formulate inputs for Indonesia SDGs Secretariat on NAP, RAP and Road Map of SDGs specifically on Regional Watershed Management (Goal 6[15] and 15[16]), Food Sustainability (Goal 2[17]), Resilient Cities (Goal 11[18]), Coastal Management (goal 14[19]) and Gender Equality Goal 5[20]). Government institutions, international NGOs, local NGOs and private sectors were involved during the process. The inputs made were considering compatibilities of goals and indicators in the global, national and regional level and at the same time involving related stakeholders as mandated by the President Regulation.

Conclusion
This paper has presented the arguments of the understandings of globalization and concludes that globalization is beyond economy and geography. In fact, there is globalization in public policy as signified by Sustainable Development Goals. SDGs is learnt to be covering many aspects. These aspects of globalization are given pathway through the SDGs. The interconnectedness of SDGs with national public policy planning was raised and it ended up to proposed solutions to address the interconnectedness. However, the solutions did not take No One Left Behind notion of SDGs. Glocalization proposed in this paper is analyzed to be addressing the interconnectedness and No One Left Behind in general and specifically addressing the issue of power and ability of agency(-ies) to make difference.  The study cases presented further describe the interconnectedness in the global, national and regional levels involving many actors. This paper highlights that glocalization refers to way of thinking or paradigm in adapting with changes occurring in the globalization era in multi-level of policy making covering various aspects.

References

CERFE Group (Ed). (May 2003). Glocalization: Research Study and Policy Recommendations. Italy: Glocal Forum. Retrieved from http://www.cerfe.org/public/GLOCAL.pdf
Faulconbridge, J. R., and Beaverstock, J. V. 2008. Globalization: Interconnected Worlds. In Clifford, N. J. et.al (Eds), Key Concepts in Geography (2nd Edition), London: SAGE.
Leidi, C. (2011, May 24). Top-down vs. Bottom-up. Bachelor Thesis. Retrieved from http://essay.utwente.nl/61106/1/BSc_B_Liedl.pdf
Ministry of Law and Human Rights. 2017. Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 59 Tahun 2017 tentang Pelaksanaan Pencapaian Tujuan Pembangunan Berkelanjutan. Kementerian PPN/BAPPENAS. Retrieved from http://www.sdgsindonesia.or.id/index.php/dokumen
Nugroho, R. 2016. Kebijakan Publik di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
OECD. 2003. Building Sustainable Societies: The Role of Social Protection. OSCE Conference on Globalization, Vienna, 3 – 4 July 2003.
Roudometof, V. 2015. Theorizing glocalization: Three interpretations. European Journal of Social Theory. SAGE. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.851.4967&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Shava, F. M. M. (2017, November 15). 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: A New Path for Development. UN. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/ecosoc/sites/www.un.org.ecosoc/files/files/en/2017doc/ecosoc.pdf
Trusteeship Chamber (2017, November 14). Ensuring that no one is left behind: Envisioning an inclusive world in 2030. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=20000&nr=291&menu=2993
UN. 2016. Final list of proposed Sustainable Development Goal Indicators. Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/11803Official-List-of-Proposed-SDG-Indicators.pdf
Zollinger, U. (2007, June 26). The Effects of Globalization on Sustainable Development and the Challenges to Global Governance. Paper on behalf of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) on the occasion of the Certificate Course, “Sustainable Development” at the University of Berne. Retrieved from http://www.kingzollinger.ch/pdf/uz_referat_e.pdf












[1] Faulconbridge and Beaverstock study that “globalization create new geographical patterns of flows and activity” (Clifford et.al, 2008: 332). Indirectly clarifying the study, Duncan presents that it “might be the in trade and capital transfers across national boundaries” (2014).
[2] In their works, Both D’Ercole and Zollinger do not categorize the fields into basic and non-basic aspects of such as what International Monetary Fund did. Those 4 (four) basic aspects of globalization according to IMF are (1) trade and transactions, (2) capital and investments movements, (3) migration and movement of people and (4) the dissemination of knowledge (G. Wirjawan, personal communication, 2 October 2017).
[3] (1) The value of trade has been soaring up since centuries ago, (2) lower transportation and communication cost have helped trade and migration, (3) supranational institutions exist to facilitate international agreement, (4) people around the world know Coldplay and want to attend its tour (G. Wirjawan, personal communication, 2 October 2017)
[4] For example, United Nations and coalitions of nations such as G8 and G20 (G. Wirjawan, personal communication, 2 October 2017).
[5] “The SDGs cover a wide range of issues such as poverty, hunger, health, education, gender inequality, sustainable energy, infrastructure, economic growth and employment, inequality, cities, sustainable consumption and production, climate change, forests, oceans, and peace, justice and strong institutions These goals are indivisible and interlinked and many of the targets cut across and support multiple SDGs, which may facilitate policy integration and synergies across different sectors” (Shava, 2017: 1).
[6] “It refers to the need to include everyone in societal processes, and conveys the notion that people should not only be allowed to thrive, but should have a voice and effective opportunities to shape the course of development” (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=20000&nr=291&menu=2993 )
[7] One of BAPPENAS roles is policy / decision making, specifically to (a) prepare national development plans, (b) prepare draft of national revenues and expenditure, (c) control and evaluate the implementation of the development plans and (d) make decisions in handling urgent and large-scale issues as required
[8] National Action Plans is to translate the term Rencana Aksi National (RAN) in the regulation
[9] Regional Action Plans is to translate the term Rencana Aksi Daerah (RAD) in the regulation
[10] Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts (UN, 2016: 17)
[11] Implement the commitment undertaken by developed-country parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to a goal of mobilizing jointly $100 billion annually by 2020 from all sources to address the needs of developing countries in the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation and fully operationalize the Green Climate Fund through its capitalization as soon as possible  (UN, 2016: 17)
[12] Promote mechanisms for raising capacity for effective climate change-related planning and management in least developed countries and small island developing States, including focusing on women, youth and local and marginalized communities (UN, 2016: 17)
[13] Indicator 13.2.1 Number of countries that have communicated the establishment of operationalization of an integrated policy/strategy which increases their ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change, and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development in a manner that does not threaten food production (including a national adaptation plan, nationally determined contribution, national communication, biennial update report or other) (UN, 2016: 17)
[14] PfR is an alliance of the Netherlands Red Cross, CARE Netherlands, Cordaid, the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate and Wetlands International
[15] Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
[16] Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
[17] Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
[18] Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
[19] Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
[20] Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

No comments:

Post a Comment