|
Introduction In his treatise on globalization The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Thomas Friedman writes that globalization - which I would define as the phenomenon brought on by the rapid development and spread of information technology and the dramatic opening of global capital and goods markets - has shrunk the world to a size small. And in this smaller world in which we now live, democracy, freedom, market economy, free trade, open markets, and competition seem to have become the global rules or "values". But many countries and individuals don't follow those "rules", and I would also argue that individuals and nations define and apply these and other "values" differently. Even in a Transatlantic context, we find varying definitions of seemingly common values - e.g., social equality, respect for human rights, protection of the environment, and preservation of national culture. It is the question of culture that we've been asked to discuss in this panel, and my opinion a crucial one in the general discussion of global values. With globalization shrinking the world to a size small, is it also shrinking national cultural identity? And will/could that lead to a backlash against globalization? Three key questions I'd like to address: 1. Does globalization lead to the homogenization of cultures and values? 2. Is global culture synonymous with American culture? 3. Is preserving cultural identity possible in a world of globalization? Case Study: French Audiovisual Policy The case of French limits on foreign films and television programming is often reduced to a battle between US "cultural imperialism" and French protectionism (disguised as cultural preservation). France's audiovisual policy artificially sets quotas for French and European content and limits to foreign content. 40% of film and television programming must be French, and another 20% European. In defense of this blatant violation of global trade rules, France argues that limiting foreign audiovisual products creates a level playing field for French and European cinema and television, which don't have the benefit of Hollywood's massive distribution system. Not surprisingly, the French are losing this battle. Despite the best efforts of a governing elite to sway them away, French consumers willingly pay money to see US films, and US tv programs are in high demand. Titanic was by far the most popular movie in France last year, and French television stations schedule popular US programs during prime-time hours. Also, France is having a tough time defending its quotas in the WTO forum (where the case is festering), and even among its European partners. But there's more to this debate than simply whether France can put limits on Bruce Willis and Baywatch and keep French tv and film consumption on a "higher" cultural plain. The audiovisual issue stems from France's fear that the French language and French culture might become extinct. As France surrenders sovereignty in other realms (economic, currency, political, defense), it struggles to protect its culture from apparent anti-French (read: US) domination. And with the World Wide Web overwhelmingly in English, French language preservationists have been put even more on the defensive. But this is not just some "French thing". The cultural component is also present in a number of other cases -EU agriculture subsidies that protect Europe's small farm culture against succumbing to the monotonous big-farm landscape of the US; the effort to keep US hormone-treated beef out of Europe; etc. The French may have a particular penchant for these cases, but the cultural preservation issue is much more than a French peculiarity and is bound to become an important and possibly quite controversial aspect of global and transatlantic economic relations. In other words, the bigger issue is about finding a balance between preserving cultural distinction and meeting international obligations in an increasingly open and linked world economy. As we rapidly approach the launch of the WTO "Millennium Round" in Seattle at the end of this month, many non-US countries and non-profit organizations are calling for consideration of "multifunctionality" in the WTO. This means that environment, social and eventually perhaps also cultural issues should be taken into consideration in trade agreements. For culture, this is extremely complicated; how do you distinguish cultural preservation from protectionism? And where do you draw the line, e.g., between what is a commodity and what is culture? (Is there a difference between a steel rod and a compact disk?) Are some forms of protection acceptable, though? Let's go back to the French theater for a minute. When you attend a movie in France, a percentage of the ticket cost goes directly to the national film institute to help subsidize French filmmaking. It doesn't matter whether the film you see is made by Francois Truffeau or Francis Ford Copolla - the tax goes to France. And that's ok, I think, as long as the subsidy doesn't unfairly disadvantage the foreign film. Back to the Big Picture So far I've asked more questions than provided answers, so let me get back to the questions I asked earlier - this time with at least partial answers - to wrap up: Is global culture synonymous with American culture? Is globalization "Americanization"? Jein (the German combination of "yes" and "no"). There's no doubt that globalization has brought MacDonald's to Macedonia, Baywatch to Burundi, and Wal Mart to just about everywhere But it has also spread non-US products, services, ideas, and customs (the world gets Taco Bell but Americans can cook Thai food). Globalization (esp. technology and the Internet) is overwhelmingly influenced by the US, and English (American) is its language; US pop culture is transmitted at a touch of a button or the click of a mouse. And the mass culture of globalization is more than just American - increasingly it is influenced by other cultures. (The most popular fad among school kids currently is Pokemon, from Japan!) Does globalization lead to homogenization? I'll be optimistic here and say "No". Back to my opening thoughts: Although globalization has probably widened the scope of universally shared values in a broad sense, I would argue that there is no one set of "global values", nor are we - thankfully - moving in that direction. Indeed, Americans might argue that globalization has its own built-in safety catch against homogenization. Globalization is based on and fosters global competition, which means that products, services, innovations will continuously try to be original, "cutting edge"- not homogenous. Is preserving cultural identity possible in a world of globalization? It has to be, otherwise the system is not sustainable. It will not be easy, particularly in international institutions like the WTO, to find a way to allow for cultural preservation without compromising trade liberalization (i.e., where is the line drawn between commodity and culture? Will trade liberalization measures be offset by a slew of culturally justified exceptions to the rules?) The alternative to not acknowledging cultural diversity is a backlash against globalization, against "American cultural hegemony". This is something that the US must guard against. How? That is the challenge ahead, in my view. A good place to start is right at home with national policies to enhance culture (remember the French movie tax to subsidies the film institute). Another idea may be to use international organizations such as the World Bank, UN, and IMF more to promote cultural diversity in ways that don't compromise free trade agreements. Without pro-active and international cooperation to find solutions, countries may increasingly erect barriers to trade and capital flows in order to protect cultural identity and because they feel like the economic and cultural losers of globalization. We should also remember that preferences can't be dictated from above; the consumer has to go along with any efforts to promote national cultural products. Transatlantic cooperation is key, because it will serve as an example for less developed countries, where a backlash against globalization and Americanization could have grave consequences for the international community, for global security, and for the citizens of the country in question. In this respect, it is important to take the French audiovisual issue seriously and for the US and Europe to focus on the broader cultural issue this case represents, and to seek solutions together. Thank you. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the numerous supporting institutions and organizers of this conference. |