Prince
El Hassan bin Talal writes about the
importance of looking into the humanizing
dimension of economic policies.
Manpower migration is a phenomenon that has
become a primary intra-regional concern in
the Middle East in recent years. In terms of
both their specific nature and relative
magnitude, the trends of this migration for
employment within our region warrant careful
evaluation and objective analysis. Just as
other economic phenomena usually entail
costs and benefits that are both social and
economic, manpower migration has generated
socio-economic costs as well as benefits
affecting most, if not all, nations in the
region. The a priori objective of
analysis should not be, as has tended in
some instances to be the case, to advocate
or support the case of one group of
countries vis-a-vis the other in terms of
distribution of the gains and burdens of
this manpower exchange. Rather than
culminating in dialectics between labour-sending
and labour-receiving countries, studies and
analyses should contribute to a more
rational approach to this important issue by
decision-makers in the area.
It can be safely stated that there is a
general consensus at least on the basic fact
that all sending and receiving states have
both benefited and been burdened, to varying
extents, by these migratory moves, which
have increased substantially in the decade
since the 1973 oil boom. Whether the gains
and losses have been distributed evenly or
unevenly, and, if adjustments are warranted,
can be matters for discussion and debate.
But what is important to keep in mind is
that the naked forces of the market should
not be the sole determinants of these
issues.
Both developed and developing nations
recognize such a principle in relation to
their domestic manpower policies, which take
into consideration socio-political as well
as economic factors. Certainly, the need for
taking due account of these socio-political
considerations is equally important, if not
more so, in the case of external manpower
policies and especially in an area like the
Middle East, suffering as it does from
instability and turmoil. Even in such
"materialistic" sectors of international
economic relations as trade or monetary
relations, greater weight is being given by
the world community to the socio-political
effects and implications of trends, policies
and adjustment mechanisms.
If and when the extent of manpower migration
reaches about 50 per cent of the total
labour force of a nation (as in the case of
Jordan), and if and when the number of
imported labourers and their dependents
exceeds that of the national residents of a
certain country (as in the case of some oil
countries in the Middle East), then surely
these trends and any ensuing adjustments
cannot be left entirely to the interplay of
the forces of supply and demand.
The fact that all have shared to varying
extents in the benefits of such trends
should not blind us to the need for a more
balanced and rational policy approach in
this vital sector, which will affect our
region and its human beings for generations
to come. It might serve a useful purpose at
this juncture, and help place the foregoing
points in proper perspective, to look
briefly at approaches that have recently
evolved in dealing with other issues of
major international concern in the field of
foreign economic relations.
Policy makers worldwide display an
increasing awareness of the reality of
economic interdependence of their respective
countries as well as among the different
regions of a shrinking globe. Coordination
of economic policies has gone beyond the
traditional field of international trade and
entered into a number of areas previously
regarded as of purely domestic concern.
Internal economic policies and actions by
individual countries, especially among the
industrialized nations, are no longer
allowed to be undertaken with disregard to
their impact on the economies of other
states.
A welcome "human" dimension has been added
to issues previously considered in abstract
or pure, hard economic terms. Thus, the
impact of trade policies on employment is
accorded concern equal to, if not higher
than, that given to their impact on foreign
reserves. While world economic headlines
continue, quite understandably, to be
dominated by matters of concern primarily to
the industrialized countries, a human aspect
is being imparted to these economic debates.
The "debt crisis" has recently superseded
the "energy crisis" in world headlines. Its
impact on the different countries and
institutions both within the North and the
South have become topics of primary
international concern. But talk of
adjustment is no longer divorced from the
human dimension of this world monetary and
financial crisis in terms of the impact of
any proposed adjustments not only on the
poorest nations but also on the poorest
segments of the population of the poorest
nations affected. The debt crisis is being
increasingly, and quite rightly, humanized.
Similarly, discussions of trade and tariffs
increasingly take into consideration their
impact on domestic employment and ensuing
social side-effects within the different
states. Even "purely domestic" monetary and
other economic policies among the leading
industrialized nations are no longer
considered in isolation from their effects
on inflation, employment and other social
matters in the domestic sectors of the other
nations.
While the humanization of such international
economic issues is to be both welcomed and
encouraged, it is disheartening to see the
resistance being put up against "humanizing"
(if one may use the term within this
context) issues which deal with the human
being himself in the first place. Many of
the decision makers involved with problems
of manpower migration would rather relegate
their resolution to the non-human invisible
hand of the market forces than put up with
the implications and complications that can
ensue from viewing such problems from a
"human" or at least a regional
socio-political perspective. Thus,
paradoxically, the non-human issues of money
and finance have been more readily humanized
than the human issues of manpower.
It is self-evident why problems of manpower
migration do not generate the same level of
concern internationally in comparison to
those of energy or international debt; the
fact is that the former afflict fewer
countries and in many instances less
severely. Beyond the limited regional, yet
expanding, nature of this phenomenon, other
features specific to it have rendered its
proper understanding and evaluation more
elusive. The framework within which manpower
migration has occurred in recent years in
the Middle East is significantly different
from the context within which migration
historically took place in the more advanced
parts of the world.
The Industrial Revolution and the ensuing
emergence of the modern industrialized world
were in the first place centred on the
emerging modern European state as an entity
and an economic unit. The spread of
industrialization across western Europe and
North America spurred the growth of
international trade. Quite naturally, the
development of modern economic thought
throughout the last two centuries reflected
vividly the issues that arose out of the
particular pattern of economic events, as
economists grappled with the more complex
economic system that was emerging and tried
to analyze and explain the newly evolving
economic relationships confronting them.
Within that framework, the migration that
occurred was that of the more permanent
type, where human waves moved permanently
from one region to settle in another (for
example, the new world) because, in many
instances, of religious persecutions, famine
or other disasters, both natural and
man-made.
Thus, quite naturally, the tools and weapons
that economists regularly pull out from
their arsenal and gingerly make available to
policy makers concerned with tackling
economic issues have descended to us through
two centuries of being moulded and shaped by
the course of events historically affecting
the industrialized world. I am not
belittling the relevance or usefulness of
modern economic analysis developed by the
North to the situation and issues of the
South; but the point I am emphasizing is
that the economic history of the industrial
world did not witness trends comparable to
the specific manpower migration that our
region has experienced in recent years. Of
course, the methodology and tools of
economics as a highly developed discipline
can be adapted and applied to our particular
situation. But no readily available models
have been developed elsewhere that can
provide a ready and swift solution or
framework of analysis.
* * * * *
Holistic development
'The most difficult thing in life is to
understand the obvious.' The obvious truism
which we need to understand and elaborate
upon today is the need for a holistic
approach to development.
A holistic approach calls for the
abandonment of theories popular in the 1950s
and 1960s which overemphasized economic
growth to the detriment of the human factor.
In the 1970s the world moved towards greater
awareness of growing poverty. The approach
adopted, based on basic needs, failed not
only because of the selfishness of the
"haves" and the helplessness of the
"have-nots", but also because it lacked a
holistic vision. The 1980s have so far seen
more selfishness and more helplessness, both
compounded by the overwhelming problems of
debt, deprivation and growing disparities
among and within countries.
In the 1990s, some rays of hope began
appearing on the horizon: a gradual move
towards ending regional conflicts, more
balanced management policies, a greater
awareness of interdisciplinary linkages and
more benefits arising from technological
advances.
To maximize the benefits of this improving
global environment, we must develop a
well-defined holistic strategy including
three basic elements. The first is to make
social development an integral part of
economic policies and human welfare a top
priority in national policy making. The
other two elements may not yet be fully
accepted; but without them we can hardly
face the 21st century. The second element is
intergenerational responsibility, which
means ensuring that this planet is not
inherited by our children with its
environment degraded, its resources depleted
and its life support system impaired.
Finally, "human solidarity" is sustained by
the recognition that adversity anywhere is a
threat to prosperity everywhere. We must
accept the reality of a "human neighbourhood"
on an ever-shrinking planet. Technological
advances have brought human beings closer to
each other, for better or for worse; and we
have to learn to live with each other,
whatever our prejudice, colour or creed.
The three elements of a holistic approach to
development can be illustrated by
identifying four specific areas which are
often neglected in global strategy.
Youth
It is estimated that by the year 2000,
people less than 30 years of age will
constitute almost 60 per cent of the world's
population.
In the South, the rapidly increasing
population of the young will pose new
challenges to social and political
structures. It will call for a radical
review of urban planning, of the labour
market, of agricultural policies, of methods
of education and vocational training, of
health care, and so forth.
In the North, the increasing population of
the old will bring about its own challenges
- to systems of social security, to the job
market, to living habits, etc
In global terms, a new generational
confrontation will need to be averted if we
are to preserve existing infrastructure and
systems.
Women
The central role played by women in the
development process is now being
increasingly recognized. Women constitute
the majority of the world's population; yet
many societies still persist in
discriminating against them.
The goals and strategies to be developed for
the year 2000 must include not only a full
awareness of this reality, but also
far-sighted recommendations for concrete
measures that can be taken to improve the
situation of women.
Women earn only 10 per cent of the world's
income and own one per cent of the world's
property. This is not only an affront to our
common humanity; it is also a sad comment on
our times when we have the means, more than
ever before, to redress such a situation,
and yet we fail to do so.
Regional cooperation
There is a growing awareness of the benefits
of regional cooperation. The increasing
number of regional organizations bears
testimony to this welcome phenomenon.
We must now identify the profiles of
different regions for the purpose of
interregional cooperation. We should ensure
that regionalism provides new building
blocks for global cooperation. The new trend
towards ending regional conflicts should be
strengthened in order to put an end to
fragmentation and exclusivity - particularly
in the field of development, where each
stands to gain from all.
Instead of reacting individually to maximize
benefits or minimize damage, we must
acknowledge the fact that individual,
isolated reactions will only aggravate the
inertia in the world economic system.
Regionalism, nourished by homogeneity,
common interests and shared perceptions,
should be used to reinvigorate
multilateralism and to promote a new
international environment conducive to
global cooperation.
Humanitarianism
Humanitarianism should no longer be seen as
"do-goodism" or as a "charity business"
adopted as a solution to the problem of
surplus commodities. Rather, it should be
viewed as a manifestation of "enlightened
self-interest".
As was pointed out in a report, entitled
Winning the Human Race? by an
independent commission which I had the
privilege to initiate, humanitarianism
demands that "whatever detracts from human
well-being must be questioned, regardless of
its effects on economic growth, political
power or the stability of a certain order".
Addressing humanitarianism problems is the
first essential step towards social
development, without which economic
development can never be sustainable.
Prince El Hassan
bin Talal of Jordan is the author of eight
books.
This is a collection of ten essays written
by Prince El Hasan bin Talal in 1984-2000.
They have a connecting theme - to enhance
the universal commonalities and promote
respect for differences among nations to
provide a framework for civilized discourse. |
|
|
