globalimaniLocandina Conferenza 20-11-2009 in pdf
20-11-2009 Conference brochure in pdf
Summary conference 20-11-2009 pdf

The lack of a clear definition and a shared approach among scholars on   Globalization of markets and social integration is the reason behind the   creation of this conference, calling different players to comment on   them.

In the first session, they take the word Mario Sepi, EESC President,   Prof. Lucio Sevi University of Turin and Prof. Alessandro Roncaglia   Sapienza University of Rome.
In his speech immediately Sepi stressed the need to recreate the   fundamental criteria of evaluation of reality, through a multi-  disciplinary approach to problems and developing new important cultural   elements. Within the globalization exists in the analysis which makes it   the President, a sort of hierarchy, which sees top financial markets,   then the markets “real” and the last “social globalization, still   backward in many other respects. There are indeed “new walls” to   partially replace old borders, “walls” primarily administrative and   legal. This demonstrates even more artificial than natural element that   is rather humanity.
This makes us wonder since “where” integration should   go and whether it must also affect the political aspects. Example of this   approach is definitely the question of the vote to immigrants, because   they constitute a large part of the economic substrate of a company and   in accordance with the principle of “no taxation without representation”. Problem that can not intersect with that of respect for fundamental   rights particularly towards immigrants in the place where they “calling”.  In reference to the delicate issue of integration, the EESC has opened an   Integration Forum to reflect on possible measures, probably tax, which   can be taken starting from the public debt, but at the same time not   strangle economic recovery. Finally, an important element taken in Lisbon   is then definitely the Bill of Rights: the existence of rights that apply   to all, due to the political level is an important factor of integration.
The intervention of Professor Lucio Levi part by the need to consider   globalization as a relatively recent phenomenon. Starting from the   dichotomy civil society / State Hegelian, it considers how the state   proves today in many ways exceeded as “historical entity”, which sees   eroded their “strength” as an economy that is outside its control, as by,   for example, the terrorist organizations, which undermine the   “traditional” monopoly of force within a given territory. So the policy   backs failing to perform its most characteristic task of “guiding” and   lead the civil society. At the same time it is invoked the intervention   of the State to remedy the failures and imbalances of the globalized   world and its market. The power policy than larger global issues is now   often only “formal”, with the market takes over, causing inevitable   process of social disintegration and the loss of the Welfare State. The   solution is perhaps to envisage the presence of new institutions post-  state, for example, draw the organs of the United Nations, taking as an   example the structure of the European Union, are similar, on a much   larger scale of the individual state, the shape of the characteristic   legislative, executive and judicial.
The intervention of Professor Roncaglia puts the accent on the phenomenon   of globalization analyzed from the point of view of trade and finance.
Currently, about this phenomenon, there are two positions, well-known to   the public, even contradictory to each other: the first in favor of   globalization, and the second totally contrary.  In support of the first argument is the idea that market liberalization   will lead to a steady development of such markets; whereas the SO-CALLED   “Anti-globalization” see in the globalization process and references to   neo-colonialism (interference centers strong on the weak).  Wanting to focus on the globalization of trade is easy to see that the   growth of the markets at global level in turn implies the need for   division of labor which, consequently, would be forced to specialize   further, bringing an increase in per capita income, all This fully   consistent with the economic theory of Smith. Nowadays, however, the   theory of the invisible hand of Smith can not find proper application and   therefore turns out to be wrong for two reasons: the first refers to the   market trends real in relation to the economic crisis and the fall in   employment due to the fluctuation of wages and So the absence of the   element of the perfect competition model required by the Adam Smith; the   other reason is due to information asymmetry. The presence of asymmetric   information explains, for example, because investors prefer to use the   services offered by investment banks although expensive, the less   knowledge on the part of the investor leads him then to resort to   specialized operators in the collection and processing of information   about the possible ways of investing money.  Based on these two aspects it was possible to assist in the financial   sector, the development of markets cd derivatives, the result of the   increase in currency speculation and interest rates that affected even   those equipped with its own capital.  Speculation, on the assumption of a static market, could have a   stabilizing effect if the random event will occur in line with   expectations and so the speculative operation will succeed, that will   produce a profit, otherwise you will have a loss It could lead to a   strong destabilization of the financial markets. The destabilization of   the speculation is due to three reasons:
the presence of tax havens, which should be fought;
theoretical and cultural reasons that led to a methodological   individualism;
the SO-CALLED markets “not perfect” as that of oil.  It follows therefore that the process of globalization is trade finance  has now started but is deployed several obstacles along the way to reach   a full conclusion.
The second session was attended by Prof. Franco Liso, professor of labor   law at the University of Rome Sapienza and Prof. Angelo Maria Petroni,   the University of Rome.
Prof. Liso has addressed the topic of the conference from his point of   view of labor law, providing an overview of how this branch of law is   approaches to the issue.  Labour law can be seen in a double projection: on the one hand as a   protection for workers, the other as compared with the competition rules. The labor law is the son of a season during which time the State was the   dominus of the territory. Today, however, the processes leading to a   mismatch because the same law is examined in its territorial variation,   as there is a push to the deconstruction of established balances. There   is also a process of devolution of trade unions and important regulatory   roles.  Globalization is the result of public policy consciously pursued and the   development of markets is a matter of promotion. Social equity is linked   to peace. Public policies have reinforced the arm liberalizing markets.  There is an asymmetry: the unregulated capital looks for situations that   ensure greater profitability, that looks for situations where the law is   less presente.L’OIL in 1998 produced a statement in which he said the   minimum principles legal must be recognized as common to all workers,   regardless of country of origin. This statement is the right claimed,   that law works on himself and develops; It identifies the basic   principles and the respect of the principle itself. Within the European   dimension of globalization we are experiencing forms of governance, where   even the same size of the legal regulation is growing: much will depend   on the conditions that will bring the different actors (such as Obama) to   take responsibility and to be interested in various social actors.
Prof. Petroni begins his speech by referring to the liberal vision of the   integration of immigrants.  Within the liberal view there are two different approaches with respect   to the integration of immigrants: it can be said that the freedom to   emigrate and work derives from the freedom of exchange, recognizing it as   an individual right therefore subjective and stressing its staff, or you   can say that such freedom does not derive from the freedom of exchange,   and thus give more weight to the political community than the individual.  The difference between the two approaches has also occurred from the   historical point of view: while in Europe the immigration came from   overpopulated countries to neighboring countries (think of the 3 million   Italians emigrated to France), in the US immigration came from countries   very distant lands largely sparsely populated.  In Italy today immigrants are part of a context of high unemployment and   often, despite their high education, performing low-skilled professions,   helping to fuel perceptions of immigrants as disadvantaged, a perception   that does not exist in the United States importing “brains” from the rest   of the world. The arrival of immigrants is not only an economic problem   because “We had asked the labor force and men have come” as Max Frisch   said, so you have to ask yourself what kind of cultures bring, how they   can interact and integrate with our society. Communities from the Third   World are strong communities, structured, and not just make them swear on   the Constitution to integrate them, but rather serves to recognize their   culture and build a system of social welfare and that includes them.
The third session of the conference protagonists Prof. Daniele Archibugi,   University of London – Birkbeck College, and Prof. Sandro Warriors,   Sapienza University of Rome.
The lecture by Prof. Archibugi opens with the statement that within the   Italian academic average age of teachers is higher than that of other   European countries: in fact in Italy 60% of the professors has more than   50 years, unlike France with 40%, the UK, Spain and Germany with 30%.  Starting from the presentation of his book “Citizens of the world” claims   that democracy has become the only legitimate form of government that   guarantees its citizens a life expectancy and a security is income that   wage higher than the non-democratic countries. The number of democratic   states has significantly increased and showed an increasing trend, both   by virtue of the process of decolonization, but especially for the   decisive effect produced by the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989.  The phenomenon of globalization has raised the issue of redefinition of   sovereignty in democratic states as it is essential interaction between   communities for the resolution of global issues: the professor wonders   how a single state can manage international phenomena such as the flu   swine.
In the 90s there was an attempt to export democracy in authoritarian   countries through military operations, according to the strategy of the   Washington Consensus. This strategy planned to export democracy within   countries, and in this lies its main limitation. The problem of democracy   today must be tackled not as a problem within the country, but looking at   the interrelationships within the world community. The professor then   articulates the proposal of a “cosmopolitan democracy” that is given more   voice to the global civil society and to stakeholders, and ensure their   effective right to citizen participation through the creation within the   UN of a World Parliament on the model of the European Parliament.
The intervention of Prof. Warriors theme is the social dimension of   European integration. The European Union must, now that the process of   ratifying the Lisbon Treaty was concluded, to make the most of this new   institutional framework must ask, how relevant point, just that   strengthening the social dimension, which has always encountered   obstacles to its realization. The existence of a European social malaise   was already noticeable in the negative result of the French referendum in   2005 that had blocked the process of ratification of the Treaty would   have provided the EU with a Constitution. This result, in fact, was the   product of the mostly negative opinion of the French working population,   who saw the process of European integration counterproductive to cope   with globalization and comparable to an “insidious Trojan horse”.  The entrance and the consolidation of the social dimension in the   integration process and have met so many different stages of progress and   deadlock: the Czech was able to start a program of re-employment of   workers laid off due to the start of the liberalization of the market;   such potential social froze with the formation of the EEC (1957) that   brought the attention of Member States to focus primarily on the   objective of construction of the free market. The economic crisis of the   70s led to a real paralysis of social policy, accompanied by a weakening   of the objective Europe, with the search for solutions to the national   crisis. A new approach began with the opening of the committee’s work   Delors (1985-1995) who has focused his studies on a program to reduce   unemployment and an increasing role of stimulus from the European   Commission to dialogue with the parties social. To date, therefore, we   can make progress, we think the adoption of the Charter of Fundamental   Rights, but also reticence (many disagreements for the use of majority   voting on social issues) that lead to hope for greater commitment in this   area , essential for the growth of a Europe not only of the institutions   but also of peoples.
Finally, the last session was attended by Prof. Giuseppe de Arcangelis,   Sapienza University of Rome, Pier Virgilio Dastoli, Director of the   European Commission and Prof. Tito Marci, Sapienza University of Rome.
Prof. De Arcangelis from the consideration that the phenomenon of   globalization, at least from an economic standpoint, it is a fact that   derives mainly by the advancement of technology, the bearer of profound   changes in international economic relations, and the consequent reduction   of transaction costs, the phenomena of integration and inclusion are its   direct consequences, and we can say, necessity. The critical point is the   lack of policy development, its inability to reorganize in the face of   global change and in the face of an international market could, however,   evolve rapidly.  This we are experiencing is not the first globalization of the story: it   was possible to find a similar phenomenon also between 1870 and 1913,   with features such as an increase in the international movement of labor,   which last to this day. But you can find some differences between the   current and previous globalization: increased, in fact, the most   qualified and emigration, in contrast, the current policies are less   comfortable, this behavior that causes a significant increase in illegal   migration over the periods previous.  The lack of political will have perverse effects on society; wonder,   then, what will lead to accelerate the reform of the institutions and if   a slow adaptation might wear down the positive effects of globalization,   it is becoming more necessary.
During his speech, the Director of the European Commission, Pier Virgilio   Dastoli, wanted to emphasize what are the shortcomings of the current   system of European governance and thus the new challenges facing the   member countries after the Treaty of Lisbon.  Central point of his analysis was a finding of the presence of a weak   point inside the European institutions themselves: the lack of legitimacy   of the incoming, the absence of a government responsible to the European   Parliament. Starting with the reaffirmation of the importance of   democracy not only representative but also participatory analysis has   shifted to what can be considered as a precondition of participation:   citizenship, the feeling of identity (not necessarily only national but   European ) and safety.  Currently, within the EU, there are many problems to solve the issue of   safety, in a moment, the nation state is no longer able to guarantee this   collective good independently, but it needs to coordinate with others and   then take action common and shared.  To do this, according to the Board, we must conceive security according   to multiple levels: the internal, which regards the burning issue of   inclusion and management of migration flows, and to guarantee the rights   of third country nationals in Europe; the external one as a right to   peace and then a chance to rethink European defense; the spiritual level,   to guarantee every person the chance to decide whether or not to profess   any religious belief; culturally, linked to training and intercultural;   the democratic respect of relations between the institutions and   citizens; and safety at work; with respect to sexual orientation and   finally environmental, becoming aware of the energy problem not only in   the interests of the internal market, but as a new purchasing policy.  In conclusion, the Board urged member countries and institutions to   rethink the current European strategy in order to form a government of   the commons that will lead to a consistent and concrete protection of   collective rights, involving the participation of citizens and guarantee   tangible and intangible assets through proper allocation and   redistribution of resources.
Finally Prof. Marci concluded the conference with its reflection   sul’integrazione social highlighting the two positions that Taylor puts   behind the development of this process: the Community is based on   ethnicity and sees the individual screened at the community center , to   which it binds via the contractual intent, and the individualistic,   resting its roots in common adherence to liberal ideals.  In this context, the Industrial Revolution was a turning point in   relations between the parties and has allowed economic exchange acquires   an absolute size of the domain of social relations. The exchange itself   has produced conditions of reciprocity through economic transactions, but   at the same time the economy has led to independence from the bonds   between individuals. And ‘in this sense that Prof. Marci, taking Adorno,   cited the leveling of a society where the quality becomes quantity of   exchanges between individuals who are no longer able to control them.  It becomes necessary then to rethink integration no longer in terms of   trade, but riconsiderandola assumptions hospitality: analyzing the origin   of this word (in the two meanings of guest and enemy) and deepening it   from the point of view of the law and ethics .  Thus continuing the speech, Prof. Marci, made reference to Kant’s   Perpetual Peace: the formation of a cosmopolitan law to which limits   should be extended hospitality, a revolutionary concept for which the   right is no longer seen only as a closure, but as inclusion, as a   reciprocity of rights and duties that does not stop the exchange and at   the same time that distinguishes the hospitality from the residence.  In this manner it would be possible to intersect the two levels of   analysis and to reconsider in a problematic way the relationship between   individuals, even strangers, and the social ties in general.