Globalization could complement diversity

Globalization could complement diversity

This is the second of two articles dealing with the issue of
globalization.

By Hilman Adil

JAKARTA (JP): The globalization process can be defined as the
action of global forces broadly favoring uniformity with regard
to substrates -- systems that are very heterogeneous given their
different evolutionary or historical backgrounds.

When confronted by these global forces, however limited they
might be by preliminary filters, like the forces of the nation-
state, the only choice is to adapt or perish.

Adaptation, however, does not involve adopting a uniform model
or a single way of thinking. Real adaptation must be based on the
evolutionary, genetic, historical and cultural heritage of the
system concerned.

It can only be tailored in accordance with the circumstances
and particular situation. In a positive sense, adaptation can
lead to systems of greater diversity in which regulation is
achieved by the interaction of different elements.

Diversity might come from social systems' ability to assume a
multicultural dimension, where integration does not assimilate to
a monolithic norm, but interacts to preserve different
identities.

Diversity may also come from economic systems based on the
diversification of productive forces. What is needed here is
regulation that has greater resilience and that takes into
account the risk of surprises, unforeseen changes and extreme
events.

On the other hand, adaptation can also lead to systems of low
diversity: monolithic, poorly differentiated societies, with a
one-way flow of information and production based on monocultures.
This would also lead to government or private-sector monopolies
and a lack of stimulus for small- and mid-sized companies, which
are the most innovative enterprises that create the most jobs.

In technical terms, regulations are distinguished by
redundance, i.e. the use of successive repetition of elements of
the same type. These systems can be very productive for a certain
period of time, but they are highly fragile and cannot withstand
change in selective pressure, whether market pressure or the
pressure of social aspirations.

At present, there is a tendency among governments in
developing countries to lead their people to believe that the
negative effect of globalization should be considered temporary,
which can be overcome by a hypothetical new surge in economic
growth.

The currency crisis now plaguing some ASEAN countries gives
ample proof that it could lead to the collapse of their economic
fundamentals. It could also lead to high unemployment, the
degradation of ecosystems and the narrowing of options as a
result of cultural diversity.

The positive aspects of globalization should also not be
overlooked. First of all, there is the possibility that poor
countries might not be burdened by excessive
protectionism.

Secondly, there is the potential for better understanding
between people, for greater acceptance of differences between
people and for new information and communications advances that
could mean a scientific and cultural payoff as well as a step
toward the democracy of knowledge.

Globalization could also lead to rapid economic growth. That,
in turn, could bring integrated development. Culturally,
globalization could allow for a better understanding of other
identities and an appreciation for the richness of other
cultures, which could eventually lead to new worldwide
solidarity.

From an environmental viewpoint, only broad international and
global initiatives can solve problems such as climate change or
the conservation and use of the world's biodiversity. Cultural
and biological diversity are the basis for development and
emphasize quality rather than undifferentiated quantity.

Even within a country subjected to strong migratory movements,
social integration should not be confused with cultural
assimilation. Creativity and originality, combined with technical
skills and diversification of products, must be the main elements
of sustainable development. Policies of mass production and an
increase in consumption can only lead to the unreal satisfaction
and irrational needs of a population.

On the other hand, we must be prepared for more disruptions,
surprises and changes as we move toward sustainable economic
development. But we can counter these negative impacts of
excessive globalization with control mechanisms, like cultural
diversity and a sense of community and belonging.

Excessive globalization can only lead to cultural uniformity
and to lifestyles that lack the conditions for sustainability,
bearing no resemblance to the cultural and historical heritage of
the population concerned.

Furthermore, extreme competitiveness of globalization could
force us to discard environmental considerations as that would
increase production costs, not taking into account social costs
inherent to certain forms of economic growth.

All of this negligence could lead to a highly unstable
situation from a social and geopolitical viewpoint and could also
harm the environment.

To achieve sustainable development, we must confront two
things that are, at the same time, opposed and complementary:
globalization and diversity. Whether globalization or diversity
should be the foundation of sustainable development should not be
the issue.

There is no opposition between them and a synthesis of the two
is possible. In fact, it is preferable to choose an intermediate
position, avoiding the extremes of both. Since we face a
nonlinear and unpredictable future, the only viable response is
to keep as many options open as possible.

We should not forget that a closed cultural identity and
diversity that does not respect others' values can only lead to
instances of exclusion, discrimination and rejection, as well as
religious and ethnic fundamentalism.

The writer is director at the Center for Social and Cultural
Studies at the National Institute of Sciences.