Download/print: *.pdf

Author:

Živilė Kėrytė, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania

Abstract

The concept of globalization is very broad and it involves and influences the whole society. This paper reveals the relationship between the discourse of globalization and the sphere of politics. Globalization is changing the whole structure of society. Politics is no more that centreorientated, and is shifting to new forms of structure. The emergence of civil society becomes as a very important component in the society‘s political sphere. But realization of civil society raises many problems for specific countries in Eastern Europe. How globalization can explicate the process of civil society formation in these countries? This question is also discussed in the paper. The shift in the political sphere has been influenced upon growing number of non-governmental organizations (NGO).  The aim of this paper is to reveal the influence of globalization on the sphere of political life and its impact on formation of civil society.    The analysis reveals that globalization process is not something you can construct as it depends upon each country with different social, economical and political patterns. Globalization changes the inner quality of the social and political life itself. Transformation of the structure of society unbound the politics. This has contributed in providing more abilities to participate in the ruling of state.

Introduction

Globalization makes all the world to be interconnected together in all aspects of contemporary society (Held et al., 1999). A lot of social processes are taking place inside and outside states national boundaries. The conception of society shifts depending on globalization discourse. Beck (2000) states that globalization means the increasing number of social processes that are indifferent to national boundaries. As it was mentioned above, the state of society is changing; together it has influence on relationship between nation-state and society. All these changes prompt the debate on the position of state of politics in the society. Beck (2000) argues that societies are entering a new condition of modernity. This transition from first age modernity to second age modernity reflects many changes in the contemporary society. Politics is into transformation phase. Nation-state is no longer the only and the main power institution.  The power is distributed to other institutions: international organizations (NATO, UNESCO, and EU), different NGOs, and other domestic state institutions. Social transformation has restructured national institutions and re-arranged international linkages. Changed relations develop new political practices that affect the formation of civil society. Transnational NGOs emerge as key actors in the process of forming successful civil society. What is the relationship between growing number of transnational organizations and the prosperity of civil society?   This paper chose to discuss globalization discourse and its impact on civil society formation in Eastern and Central Europe countries. These countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Slovakia, Belarus, Romania, Hungary and etc.) experienced different history with separate social, economical and political patterns.  The ―global‖ takes the important role in the formation of civil societies of post-soviet countries. The ―global‖ is a new category that demand to think about new power organizing forms. As Corry (2006, p. 304)  states, ―International relations (global networks) are increasingly spoken of in terms of world politics, and while nobody imagines that the state has already withered away, the question for some commentators is now not whether it is being transformed but how‖.  The aim of this paper is to reveal the influence of globalization on the sphere of political life and its impact on formation of civil society.   This paper consists of four parts. The first part overviews globalization discourse, including such problems as the meaning of ―global‖, the emergence of new social categories, new ―borders‖, the diminish of the nation-state power. The second part compares formation of civil society in Western and Eastern countries. The third section of this article reveals relationship between transnationalism and civil society (domestic integration). In the fourth part presents the author‘s view, how the formation of civic society in the globalization context is understandable. The paper offers the main trends, which characterizes the civil society of Eastern and Central Europe countries.

The discourse of globalization

Globalization is a term which becomes more and more central to the social sciences. In order to understand the global processes and structures that have altered the nature of politics, some concepts need to be clarified.  Three schools of thought were developed in order to understand and explain the social phenomenon of globalization. These three schools are as follows: the hyperglobalizers, the skeptics, and the transformationalists (Held et al., 1999). These schools develop different approaches for analyzing the society; however, this paper presents only those related to the change of political sphere in the society. The hyperglobalists talk about the demise of nation-state, which cannot control its own citizens (Held et al., 1999). Further they claim that the sovereignty and autonomy of the state will erode in time. The skeptics say that really ―nothing much has changed‖ (Held et al., 1999). For them globalization is a myth and world is only perfectly integrated global market. ―The transformationalists assert that a new ‗sovereignty regime‘ is displacing traditional conceptions of statehood as an absolute, indivisible, territorially exclusive and zero-sum form of public power ― (Held from Held et al., 1999). The human becomes important in decision making, because the power is diffused. Globalization changes the inner quality of the social and political life itself.  Today the sovereignty is understood ―less as a territorially defined barrier than a bargaining resource for a politics characterized by complex transnational networks‖ (Keohane from Held et al., 1999). The concept of globalization over the last decade was discussed by many scholars of social sciences. Thus the globalization debate of its forever multiplying points of difference demands to unpack the terms of the conceptual consensus and to look ―on the constitution of the ‗global‘ as a common point of reference and an object of inquiry‖  (Bartelson, 2000, p. 181). The author makes three distinct concepts of globalization and how they have extended within different theoretical context. The first and most common sense of globalization is that of globalization as a transfer or exchange of things between constituted units (for example political, economic or cultural units). Globalization as transference implies that the system and the units remain identical with themselves throughout the globalizing process. The system doesn‘t change, units boundaries exist. This understanding of globalization is more abstract, because it doesn‘t provide the possibility understand the process of globalization as a social fact. On the second concept frames the process of globalization is perceived as transformation that occurs at the systems level, and it affects not only the system but identity of the units as well. At this level Bartelson (2000) notices that globalization might be considered as a social fact, which takes place in a global totality, it presupposes that we can conceptualize the world as something more than the sum of its constituent parts. But still the first and the second concepts of globalization preserve the distinction between unit and system. The third concept of globalization removes this distinction. Everything what takes place beyond this world can only be rendered transparent. It is understandable, ―globalization implies the transcendence of those distinctions that together condition unit, system and dimension identity‖ (Bartelson, 2000, p. 189). Globalization is not something we can construct; affect from outside or inside, globalization is driven forward by a dynamic of its own.  The concept of globalization is today less an ideological weapon, than itself a vehicle for conceptual transformation and movement (Bartelson, 2000). It has to be admitted that globalization changed the world, how it is conceived and defined. Globalization transforms everything it touches. Conceptions of notions such as state, power, nation, sovereignty and society became problematic and controversial analyzing them from various globalizations‘ discourses.   The understanding of the concept of globalization has been changing time from time in the history. And now scholars are talking about particular studies, autonomous field, where various set of discourses, will be discussed and analyzed from the perspective of globalization. Globalization is a dynamic process that affects and is affected by distinct social dimensions and processes every moment in the social world. Though the awareness that globalization is a powerful process that destabilizes the entire sociopolitical context expands, the goal to grasp globalization and its boundaries remains still tricky. Therborn (2000) suggests the other way to reveal the concept of globalization. He states that globalization as a concept of social theory and analysis should meet three criteria: it should have precise meaning, be usable in empirical investigations and the third criterion means that the concept should be abstract, not containing any a priory statements of concrete content. Regarding those criterions globalization is defined as referring to ―tendencies to a world-wide reach, impact, or connectedness of social phenomena or to a world-encompassing awareness among social actors (Therborn, 2000, p. 154).  Three phases distinguished by Beck gives the clarity how the code word ‗globalization‘ has been used in the social sciences: first, denial, second, conceptual refinement and empirical research, and, third, epistemological shift (Beck from Rantanen, 2005). The first reaction of existing reality was to deny the globalization (primarily it was economic) and to declare that nothing under ‗globalization‘ on the social scientific agenda was historically new. The second phase begins when social scientists in the most diverse disciplines starts to subject the phenomena of globalization to conceptual analysis. The third phase is recognized when humans are facing with the blurred social categories. Distinction between internal and external, national and international, local and global loses their sharp contours. These circumstances are defined as an epistemological turn, when premises and boundaries that define social categories disintegrate (Beck from Rantanen, 2005).   Despite the diversity of explanations what does globalization means, the nature of the ―global‖ still remains complex and requires for response. Urry (2003) suggest that the ―global‖ has to be analyzed as a sort of system and how the systemic properties of the global interact with the properties of the other entities such as those of ―society‖. The social science of globalization had taken the global system for granted and then shown how localities, regions, nation-states, environments and cultures are transformed in linear fashion by this all-powerful ‗globalization‘ (Urry, 2003). On the contrary, Urry (2003) affirms that complexity would see such a system as diverse, historical, fractured and uncertain. Urry (2003) uses ideas from the ―new physic‖ in order to explain and define the concept of ‗complexity‘. The nature of ‗new physics‘ says that ―contemporary science no longer sees anything ‗as static, fixed and given‘. The observer changes that which is observed, apparent hard-and-fast entities are always comprised of rapid movement, and there is no structure that is separate from process‖ (Rifkin from Urry, 2003, p. 7). In some sense Urry‘s (2003) conception is related with Bartelson‘s (2000) concept of globalization as transcendence. When globalization is defined in terms of transcendence, it means that it brings change not only to units and system but also to the conditions of existence of objects of inquiry and the fields where they are situated (Bartelson, 2000). Globalization becomes very dynamic whereas ‗despatializes‘ and ‗detemporalizes‘ human practices as well as the conditions of human knowledge (Bartelson, 2000).

Globalization and politics

Relationship between two concepts ‘globalization‘ and ‘politics‘ is very intensive and ambivalent. On one hand one might think that everything is changing for the better. Humans live a better life, they have better living conditions than it was earlier; various international and transnational organizations beyond national boundaries seek to defend human rights, formal and informal institutions rights, and economical, political organizations rights. On the other hand humans encounter many problems living in a globalized world. Power is diffused but we still do not feel free. People experience various conflicts and risky situations in their daily life. People don‘t know whom they can trust.    The new concept ‗global politics‘ is emerging as a useful tool to capture the stretching of political relations across space and time, the extension of political power and political activity across the boundaries of the modern nation-state (Held et al., 1999). The concept of global politics avoids the distribution of politics to local or international, domestic or foreign. Decisions or actions made in one part of the world can rapidly get response in other parts of the world. All actions and decisions are linked through the rapid communication technologies and meet in a global arena.  Although all institutions that have power and decision right meet in global arena, nation-state still remains powerful actor. Tarrow (2001) claims that states remain dominant in most areas of policy, for example in maintaining domestic security. States still control their borders and exercise legal authority within them. The active participation of transnational, international and NGO‗s take the significant place in a public, community and people lives. Each problem the human confronts with can be effectively settled when reciprocal cooperation between formal (state, politics) and informal (transnational, international and NGO‘s) institutions exist.

The first modernity & the second modernity

Within the relationship between globalization and society, the shifting status of society and its parts need to be discussed. Beck (2000) distinguishes two stages of modernity: first age of modernity and the second age of modernity. When Beck (2000) explains his theory and paradigm shift, he distances himself from the theoretical schemes of postmodernism. Postmodernists emphasize the end of modernity, but Beck (2000) confirms that modernity is only beginning with the development of the new social sciences categories. The internal quality of the ‘social‘ is changing, what constitutes ‘society‘ and ‘politics‘ becomes in itself questionable, because the principles of territoriality, collectivity and frontier are becoming questioned (Beck, 2000). The categories framing world society – the distinction between developed and underdeveloped countries – are collapsing (Beck, 2000). This author emphasizes that there is not one modernity; there are a lot of modernities. Western and non-Western countries perceive globalization in their own way. In the first age of modernity the non-Western were defined by their otherness or ‘premodern‘ character.  In the second age of modernity everyone has to locate oneself in the same global space and is confronted with similar challenges (Beck, 2000).  In the second age of modernity the relationship between politics and society must be redefined. Politics tied to the nation-state boundaries looses its significance. Territorially bounded politics can no longer remain the most important in the contemporary society. Beck (2000) supposes that strong community ties among citizens, solidarity with strangers and development, restructurization of national institutions can make civil society motivated, elaborated and successful. Hajer (2003) accepts the idea of Beck (2000) and affirms that context of policy making is changing; solutions of problems cannot be found only within the boundaries of sovereign polities.  Power is dispersed to different institutions that act on the national, international or transnational levels. Governments are sharing power with businesses, with international organizations, and with a multitude of citizens groups (Mathews, 2004). The weakening of the state here goes hand in hand with the international growth of civil society, the emergence of new citizen-actors and new forms of mobilization (Hajer, 2003). However, Beck (2000) raises a question – how can decisions, which are at once post-national and collectively binding, be made? The answer is socialization of shared risks. Risks presuppose decisions, definitions and permit individualization. Risk creates a shared space for values, responsibilities and action that transcends national boundaries. According to Beck (2000), the accepted definition of threat thus creates and binds – across national boundaries – cultural values. It promotes solidarity among citizens inside and outside boundaries. Risk regime also implies a hidden, community building aspect and force (Elkin from Beck, 2000).   Beck (1992) distinguishes the transformation of politics in the perspective of the second age of modernity (reflexive modernity) into two respects. In discussion Beck (1992) uses Habermas‘s phrase ‗new obscurity‘, which hides these two respects. The first one states that centralized political system is experiencing the loss of power in the course of enforcement and utilization of civil rights in the sense of new political culture; the second emphasizes the changes in the social structure that implies the transition from non-politics to sub-politics. Beck (1992) uses the term ‗sub-politics‘ to refer to forms of politics outside and beyond the representative institutions of the political system of nation-states. It becomes clear that finding political solutions is contingent; there is neither a single nor the ‗best‘ solution, instead there are always several solutions available. The process of decision-making in politics field must be understood as a process of collective action (Crozier and Friedberg from Beck, 1992). These two perspectives mentioned above uncover the process of ‗unbinding the politics‘. Beck (1992) relates it with process of political modernization in a sense it disempowers and unbinds politics and politicizes society.

The formation of civil society

In order to explain how globalization is influencing the society, especially the sphere of politics, the civil society formation process must be presented. There is the divergent academic discussion in the East and the West about the meaning of civil society. Narozhna (2004) maintains that the Western type of civil society is the product of a relative lengthy and unique social evolution in the West. Societies in Eastern Europe have distinct cultural, socio-economic and political characteristics. Society must be developed and elaborated from the inside, not from the outside. Of course, it can be induced by foreign assistance policies but only if they are sensitive to the cultural life and historical experience shared by members of the target society (Narozhna, 2004). Most Western and Eastern academic conceptualizations of civil society overlap in the approach that a viable civil society is represented not simply by a network of organizational forms, but also by a certain type of interaction within and among them built on trust and tolerance (Narozhna, 2004). It‘s a system of cultural norms and values that are diffused in a network. Kaldor (2003) defines civil society as the medium through which one or many social contracts between individuals, both women and men, and the political and economic centres of power are negotiated and reproduced.   However, Narozhna (2004) emphasizes that the notion of civil society throughout Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union is closely intertwined with nationalism. The concept of ‗nation‘ has become a necessary component of the conceptualization of civil society, because of the regime of Soviet Union. The collapse of Soviet Union from this perspective symbolized the rejection of Soviet supra-nationalism (Bunce from Narozhna, 2004). Looking from this perspective the rebuilding of civil society in post-soviet countries is only possible through the revival of national identity. By contrast, the West thinks that involving a national ingredient to the conceptualization of civil society is not necessarily or compulsory. Like Robert Putnam, for example, believe that civil society can flourish at the local or regional level without implicating national sentiments at all (Narozhna, 2004).  Unfortunately, when Western donors were rushing to democratize the former socialist world, they have overlooked the very important detail, the significance of the concept of nation. By the mid-1990s, the idea that NGOs equal civil society was deeply rooted in the minds of Western donors; civil society was understood as a set of diverse NGOs. This explains the NGO boom in countries of Eastern and Central Europe. In 1994-95, 30,000 NGOs were registered in Czech Republic and 43,000 in Hungary (Narozhna, 2004). In Lithuania the development of NGO was intensified after 1991. Exactly, the majority of NGOs were established in that period (soon after renewal of Lithuanian independence) (NGO information and support center, 2007). Despite the failure to democratize as soon as possible and to establish the civil societies in former Soviet countries, Western experts still believed they were the only ones equipped with the knowledge and experience of civil society without considering the need to expand the model of civil society in accordance with indigenous needs and capabilities.  What is needed to build viable civil societies in the post-socialist world must separate them from the implicit identification with Western-type plural society (Narozhna, 2004). It implies that most post-socialist societies lack well-entranched independent institutions counterbalance the state. And there are constraints, beliefs and predispositions inherent in the very nature of the social order (distinctive social reality of each country), and it must be respected.  But we cannot forget that in contemporary society of the moment the new term ―global civil society‖ is taking its place. As civil society is no longer confined to the borders of territorial state, it changes its reality and is understood in relation with the global context. A new form of politics, which we call civil society, is both an outcome and an agent of global interconnectedness (Kaldor, 2003). Kaldor (2003) supports Narozhna‘s (2004) notion and claims that global civil society is not only NGOs, but a process through which social contracts are negotiated at global, national and local levels, including all the various mechanisms through which individuals voices can be heard.

Transnationalism and domestic integration/civil society

Globalization reflects the changes that give a new shape and structure to contemporary society. Most social scientists agree that ‗transnationalism‘ broadly refers to multiple ties and interactions linking people or institutions across the borders of nation-states (Vertovec, 1999).  Strict division between nation-state and international borders becomes meaningless.  Globalization promotes the creation of the transnational social spaces. Transnationalism describes a condition in which, despite long distances and presence of national borders, relationships have been globally intensified and take place in an arena of activity (Hannerz and Castells from Vertovec, 1999).  The transformation of society structure and the development of transnational ties can be clarified as a process of dichotomy. The transformation of social structure allowed to decrease the center-oriented government power and to unbind the sphere of politics. The unbinding of politics expanded the flows of transnational ties. From other side increasingly developing and widely diffused transnational ties are transforming and changing the society itself. Civil society provides a legitimizing platform for discordant and radical demands (Kaldor, 2003). Strict territory borders are vanishing; civil society including NGO activities is more affective and significant.  Roudometof (2005) states that transnationalism emerged in the 1990s as a new concept aiming to describe immigrant cohorts (in North America and Western Europe) that tries to integrate into labour force and industrial society. But over the last decade the concept has been extended and applied to defining, for example, activism across borders, religious and social movements.  Roudometof (2005) uses Beck‘s concept ―internal globalization‖ in order to define the notion of transnationalism. Beck uses this concept to highlight the reality of micro-globalization (Knorr and Cetina from Roudometof, 2005). Globalization affects not only macro-structures (economic, politics, society), but also it affects everyday life of social actors at the micro level. Accordingly to this, transnationalism should be understood as the emerging reality of social life.   Stark et al. (2005) uncover the relationship between two twinned processes. At the same time East Central Europe‘s fragile civic organizations are sinking their roots into the domestic society, they are also building transnational ties to actors outside the country. Researchers want to find the answer to question ―Can global connectedness co-exit with local rootedness?‖ (Stark et al., 2005). These authors found out that civic associations with transnational ties are more likely to have deep roots in domestic societies than others without such ties. Civic organizations with transnational ties are more likely to be participatory and embedded in networks of local civic organizations. In considering the interaction between transnationalism and domestic integration authors emphasize the importance of formation of civil society.  Strong and integrated civil society is a key of successful social, economical and political inclusion. Integration is about connectivity whether is in the connections between organizations and their actively participating citizens (rootedness) or in the network ties among civic organizations within the sector (Stark et al., 2005).

Towards understanding the formation of civil society in the globalization context 

In this section four units which put together make a structured model of the civil society formation in the globalization context are distinguished. Eastern and Central Europe countries with different from Western countries social, economical and political patterns experienced theirs own history of civil society formation. The meaning of such categories as society, power, citizen, relations and state-nation has to be revised.

Global networks – their meaning and importance

The meaning and function of the concept of globalization has a significant implication on understanding the political practices in the society. Globalization and its impact on civil society uncover a challenge to the nation-state system because it ―represents an ongoing project of civil society to reconstruct, re-imagine, or re-map world politics‖ (Lipschutz, 1992, p. 391). As civil society doesn‘t exist outside democratic setting, we see that society with new organization forms reconfigured the concept of state as well. The discourse of globalization in Eastern and Central Europe is a new phenomenon together with the rebirth of the concept of civil society in a global form.

Actively participating citizens in a global context 

Corry (2006) states that rather  than defining civil society to begin with and then evaluating it, the interesting question is how actors themselves fashion it and how it functions—in this case how it might be reconfiguring the idea of global politics. A lot of NGOs are emerging in post-soviet countries with the idea and goal to change the society. There are national and international NGOs established. NGO‘s have to be build considering the socialist legacies, traditional beliefs and social images shared by the members of post-socialist societies (Narozhna, 2004). All these constitute an organized social activity and the social life.

NGOs as actors of social change

Globalization changes the inner quality of the social and political life itself. Today we talk about new political practices and new forms of organizations. A new form of political practice, called civil society, is an outcome of global interconnectedness. NGOs are the outcome of the formation of civil society. But as it was mentioned above the text, NGOs doesn‘t constitute the civil society. NGOs are as actors of social change in the society. They reflect the messages, the categories from inner life, in what people believe and whom they trust. What is happening outside the world has an influence on individuals who interprets it inside their understanding and in turn takes an action to change the outside world.

Re-configuration of domestic institutions 

The exclusion of this part was made in order to emphasize that domestic institutions in a global arena has to adjust the new conditions and new thinking, which tells that power is diffused now and decisions and actions have to be made together. Civil society in a global context ―tends to see itself in terms of being in opposition to power in many forms – rather than just state power – diversity is a concomitant feature of the term (Corry, 2006, p. 317).

Conclusions

Globalization transforms the whole society and its changes affect us in any area of the globe we are living. The structure of society, including sphere of politics, is changing and shifting. New forms of civil participation are emerging as an alternative of state government ruling. The emergence of civil society becomes a very important component in the society.  Transformation of the structure of society has unbound the politics. This has contributed in providing more abilities to participate in the ruling of state. Although Tarrow (2001) claims that states remain dominant in most areas of policy, they still control their borders and exercise legal authority within them, but the diffusion of power between state and non-state actors allow all of them to participate in the process of decision- making.    The formation of civil society in post-soviet countries in Europe proceeds not so fast as Western countries expected. But some inadequate actions from Western countries prevented the successful realization of this process. Society must be developed and elaborated from the inside, not from the outside. Of course, it can be induced by foreign assistance policies but only if they are sensitive to the cultural life and historical experience shared by members of the target society (Narozhna, 2004). What is happening outside the world has an influence on individuals who interprets it inside their understanding and in turn takes an action to change the outside world. Actively participating citizens constitute the foundation of social life. The social activity of the society member‘s constraint of that they think and do.  That‘s why any development model of civil society formation cannot be established or transferred without understanding of the cultural context. Research in Hungary revealed that civic associations with transnational ties are more likely to have deep roots in domestic societies than others without such ties. Civic organizations with transnational ties are more likely to be participatory and embedded in networks of local civic organizations. Looking from this point the relationship between flows of transnational ties and prospering of civil society is viable. But to understand how this works we need further empirical research in post-Soviet countries.

References

1. Bartelson, J. (2000). Three concepts of Globalization. International sociology, No.15, pp.180-196.
2. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: towards a New modernity. Sage Publication. London, p. 249.
3. Beck, U. (2000). The cosmopolitan perspective: sociology of the second age of modernity. British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 51, Iss. 1, pp. 79-105.
4. Corry, O. T. (2006). Global Civil Society and its Discontents. Voluntas, No. 17, pp. 303-324.
5. Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, No. 36, pp. 175-195.
6. Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., Perraton, J. (1999). Global Transformations. Politics, Economics and Culture. Published by Polity Press, p. 493.
7. Kaldor, M. (2003). Global Civil Society: an answer to war. Polity Press, p. 189.
8. Lipschutz, R. (1992). Reconstructing world politics: The emergence of global civil society. Millennium, Vol. 21, No.3, pp. 389–420.
9. Mathews, T. J. (2004). Power Shift. In Lechner, Frank J. and Boli, John. 2nd ed. The Globalization Reader, USA and UK, Blackwell Publishing.
10. Narozhna, T. (2004). Foreign aid for a post-euphoric Eastern Europe: the limitations of western assistance in developing civil society. Journal of International Relations and Development, Vol.7, Iss. 3, pp. 243-268.
11. NGO information and support center (2007). NGOs in Lithuania. Available at: http://www.nisc.lt/nvo_lietuvoje.php
12. Rantanen, T. (2005) Cosmopolitanization – now!: An interview with Ulrich Beck. Global Media and Communication, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 247-263.
13. Roudometof, V. (2005). Transnationalism, Cosmopolitanism and Glocalization. Current Sociology, January, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 113-135.
14. Stark, D., Vedres, B., Bruszt L. (2005). Global Links, Local roots. Varieties of Transnationalization and forms of Civic Integration, p. 36.
15. Tarrow, S. (2001). Transnational Politics: Contention and Institution in International politics. Annual Review of Political science, No. 4, p. 19.
16. Therborn, G. (2000) Globalizations: Dimensions, Historical Waves, Regional Effects, Normative Governance. International Sociology, 15, pp. 151-179.
17. Urry, J., (2003). Global complexity. Cambridge: Polity.
18. Vertovec, S. (1999). Conceiving and Researching Transnationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol. 22, No. 2, p. 26.

Download/print: *.pdf.

Author:

Laima Matulevičiūtė, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania

Abstract

The article starts from a short analysis and general presentation of dependency and interdependency theoretical basics, which is important for further understanding of the European Union‟s formation logic, which follows common globalization and dependency trends. Later small chapter presents Lithuanian historical background, which could be valuable for those readers, who are not very familiar with particularly Lithuanian, or at least – with Baltic region formation and historical experience. Finally, three major scenarios of dependence and inter-dependence in cultural, economical and political field are presented. In this particular case, Lithuanian example presents inter-dependency situation, where Lithuania stands in the middle between the European Union on the one side and Russia on the other. This complicated position is viewed from three, probably the most important positions: dependency in cultural, economical and political fields. So here short provision of an accurate analysis of the issues and controversies regarding globalization are presented.

Introduction

There is a general and hardly to deny trend that our world may be considered as ever more global in character and orientation. In this aspect, term “globalization” refers to a world in which societies, cultures, politics and economies have come closer together. Such a process also involves enhancing the free movement of goods, services, capital, information and people across national boundaries. In these conditions, the question logically arises if in our post-modern world, states and boundaries are becoming less-powerful agents and symbols despite contradictory history and relations in the past? And to what extent dependency or inter-dependency theory of the shrinking world coincides with the real world‟s practice? These questions are answered in this article from one particular case – Lithuanian experience. Lithuania, even it is a small state, was chosen due to various and different experience – close and long-lasting relations with Russia, which made a major impact on Lithuanian identity formation and due to changed political situation after joining European Union. This case is also a good example of how foreign policy is a much more complex area for small countries than it is for large ones. Due to this complexity we will be able to overlook dependency and inter-dependency between the European Union – Lithuania – Russia. In this respect Lithuania goes between two world powers – Europe as a whole and Russia. And we may see that theory, which claims that world is becoming one global part, universal, with strong liberal democracies relations and peace, is not working properly in everyday life. For this research, three major, and probably the most important fields were chosen: cultural, economical and political ones. Structural parts of the article start from short analysis and general presentation of wellknown dependency and inter-dependency theoretical basics, which is very important for further understanding the European Union‟s formation logic, which follows common globalization and dependency trends. Later small chapter presents Lithuanian historical background and finally, after getting familiar with mentioned background, three major scenarios of dependence and interdependence in cultural, economical and political field are presented.

Dependency and inter-dependency theory

In order to analyze dependency and inter-dependency theory, firstly “globalization” term should be presented. So what is globalization in general? This question is not easy to answer – there is a lot of confusion about the term, and about the rhetoric of the “new world order” following the end of the Cold War. Hence, globalization may be conceived as a myth, a rhetorical device, a phenomenon, an ideology, a reality or rationality. In both academic and popular discourses globalization has become one of the catchwords of the 1990s (Potter et al., 2004). In fact, globalization is a short form for a cluster of related changes: economic, ideological, technological, and cultural. Economic changes include the internationalization of production, the greatly increased mobility of capital and of trans-national corporations, and the deepening intensification of economic interdependence.  The economic manifestations of globalization could include the spatial reorganization of production, the interpenetration of industries across borders, the spread of financial markets, the diffusion of identical consumer goods across distant countries, and massive transfers of population. Ideological changes include investment and trade liberalization, deregulation, privatization, and the adoption of political democracy in the institutional realm. Technological changes include information and communications technologies that have shrunk the globe and the shift from goods to services. Finally, cultural changes involve trends toward harmonization of tastes and standards, a universal world culture that transcends the nation-state (Kacowicz, 1998). All these fields, furthermore, creates the root for inter-dependence between various social groups, which is the most important insight in the article. So, as it was mentioned previously, globalization may be defined as the intensification of economic, political, social, and cultural relations across borders. Such trend leads to the current situation, where we live in an era of inter-dependence. This vague phrase expresses a poorly understood, but widespread feeling that the very nature of world politics is changing. In respect of economic globalization, distance has become less important to economic activities, and large corporations subcontract to branch plants in far distant regions, effectively operating within “borderless” world. Thus, the terms “dependency” and “inter-dependency” should be determined as well. Broadly speaking, dependence means a state of being significantly affected by external forces. Inter-dependence means mutual dependence. Inter-dependence in world politics refers to situations characterized by reciprocal effects among countries or among actors in different countries. These often effects result from international transactions – flows of money, goods, people and messages across international boundaries. The effects of transactions on inter-dependence depend on constrains or costs, associated with them. For example, a country that imports all of its oils is likely to be more dependent on a continual flow of petroleum than a country importing furs, jewelry or perfume. So the crucial issues of inter-dependence revolve around the old question – “who gets what?” (Kelly, 2007). In the paper below the answer has given from Lithuanian example which closely relates with economical dependence on Russian oil and gas.  From the historical perspective, dependency theory originally was the first major Third World challenge to Europe-central academic discourse. It was also limited in respect that restricted its attention almost exclusively to the economic and, to a lesser extent, the political mechanisms of domination and control. But these economic, political and cultural spheres are intimately intertwined. These different spheres have a small degree of autonomy from each other as well, and it is for this reason that change in the cultural sphere, in the Gramscian sense of a “war of position”, is central to an important dimension of change in the economic and political spheres (Tucker, 1999).  The definitions of dependency all indicate that the relations between dominant and dependent states are dynamic because the interactions between the two sets of states tend to not only reinforce but also intensify the unequal patterns. Moreover, dependency is a very deep-seated historical process, rooted in the internationalization of capitalism. Dependency is an ongoing process here (Keohane and Nye, 2005). After having short look over the dependency and inter-dependency theoretical basics in a contemporary world, next paragraph of the article includes presentation of European Union formation logic due to growing dependence and inter-dependence model.

Following history – the European Union creation

Before becoming a real political objective, the idea of uniting Europe was just a dream in the minds of philosophers and visionaries. Victor Hugo, for example, imagined a peaceful “United States of Europe” inspired by humanistic ideals. The dream was shattered by the terrible wars that ravaged the continent during the first half of the 20th century (Viegnes, 2005). However, a new kind of hope emerged from the rubble of World War II. People who had resisted totalitarianism during the war were determined to put an end to international hatred and rivalry in Europe and create the conditions for lasting peace. Between 1945 and 1950, a handful of courageous statesmen including Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, Alcide de Gasperi and Winston Churchill set about persuading their peoples to enter a new era. According to them, new structures should be created in Western Europe, based on shared interests and founded upon treaties guaranteeing the rule of law and equality between all countries. Robert Schuman (French foreign minister) took up an idea originally conceived by Jean Monnet and, on 9 May 1950, proposed establishing a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). In countries which had once fought each other, the production of coal and steel would be pooled under a common High Authority. In a practical but also richly symbolic way, the raw materials of war were being turned into instruments of reconciliation and peace (Vitkus, 2005). Nowadays it may be often heard that during the years there had been undeniable progress in economic and political integration within the European Union (EU). Borders inside the Single Market have dropped, common standards for producing everything from screws to paper are in place, and citizens of all participating states are now subject to common laws on a variety of issues. Young people are growing up in a world structured not by the national antagonisms of the Cold War, but instead by a supra-national European space. But on the other side, when it comes to standardizing and centralizing European policy on a variety of issues, people seem to hold tighter their local identities. Instead of adopting a sense of “Europeaness” as a meaningful form of identity and a structure of belonging, the general public seems to regard any such assertions of shared identity as artificial creations of political manoeuvring (Croucher, 2003). Also, due to globalization trend all over the world, the European Union countries, especially those, who introduced the Euro – became super inter-dependent between each other in many fields. The affects of inter-dependence are so wide-spread, that it would be difficult to put them in any statistical trend.  Another important side is that despite inter-dependence, countries still maintain a small level of autonomy which leads to the ongoing competition for the better position in economical or political field. We can clearly see the extent in which national interests confront each other in parliamentary treaties, economic policy and industrial contracts, but also how national boundaries are instantiated in the bodies of ordinary people who make their lives and pursue their work in explicitly European context (Ravenhill, 2008). Europe in the 21st century still faces safety and security issues. The EU has to take effective action to ensure the safety and security of its members. It has to work constructively with the regions just beyond its borders: the Balkans, North Africa, the Caucasus and the Middle East. It should also protect its military and strategic interests by working with its allies, especially within NATO, and by developing a genuine common European security and defence policy. So this is another important area, where Europe is inter-dependent, especially on the new-security issues such as terrorism, ecological transformations, various disasters or viruses. There is no doubt that on this kind of problems, single action means only a minor role, so united and powerful action is needed here.  As the EU declares itself, all this inter-dependence and common plans, actions leads to the ideal vision: stands for a view of humanity and a model of society that the great majority of its citizens support, where Europeans cherish their rich heritage of values, which includes a belief in human rights, social solidarity, free enterprise, a fair distribution of economic growth, the right to a protected environment, respect for cultural, linguistic and religious diversity and a harmonious blend of tradition and progress (Zabusky, 2004). One of the main the EU slogan‟s roots may be found here – “Managing diversity” in inter-dependent European sphere is on the top of importance.

Short brief of Lithuanian history and nation formation

There is no doubt that Lithuania‟s past is rich and marked by complexity. But probably every country in Europe could claim the same – it would be hard to compare Lithuanian historical situation with, for example, Balkan region situation or visa versus. But for a better understanding of Lithuanian national identity distinguishing features and transformation nowadays, it is necessary to overlook Lithuanian history at least in short extent. Lithuania for the first time in writing sources was mentioned in 1009. It was divided into local duchies during the 11th to 12th centuries. Later, in the 13th century, to protect themselves against the Livonian and Teutonic knights, they formed a strong, unified state which, by absorbing neighbouring Russian principalities, became one of the largest in medieval Europe by the late 14th and early 15th centuries, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania stretched from the Baltic to the Black seas (Bumblauskas, 2005). This particular period is often described as a glory moment in Lithuania history, and many scientists were looking here in order to find nation‟s roots, which could be full of honour and glory.  Later, between 1386 and 1569, Lithuania gradually merged with Poland. But in 1795, due to changing political situation, it came under Russian control. However, in the 18th century it was erased from political map at all. During World War I (1914-1918) the German army occupied Lithuania, but finally at the end of the war, on 16 February 1918 in Vilnius, the Council of Lithuania declared Lithuania an independent state and it was fully reestablished as a democratic state (Bumblauskas, 2005). But, unfortunately, it was only a short lived independence. Later it faced many drawbacks including many deaths in World War II and further catastrophe after being annexed by the Soviet Union. As a result of World War II, Lithuania suffered immense deprivations, with gigantic losses and damage. The nation found itself on the brink of physical annihilation.  Another important date to Lithuania history is 23rd August, 1939 when Germany signed a secret agreement with the Soviet Union, on the division of the spheres of influence, the document known as the secret Hitler-Stalin Pact (Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact) and initially, Lithuania was relegated to the German sphere of influence; however, on Lithuania‟s refusal to attack Poland as a German ally, it was transferred to the Soviet sphere of influence, in a second secret pact signed in Moscow on the 27th of September the same year.  In the summer of 1944 the Soviets re-occupied Lithuania, and re-established it as a Soviet republic. The Soviet government deported about 350,000 Lithuanians to labour camps in Siberia as punishment for holding anti-communist beliefs or resisting Soviet rule. In 1949 the Communist regime most churches were closed, many priests were deported, and possessing religious images were prosecuted. Additional deportations and a great influx of Russians and Poles into Vilnius were noted in 1956. Subsequently, Lithuania settled into comparative calm, and most nations tacitly accepted its status as a Soviet Republic, although the United States never recognized its incorporation into the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (Anušauskas, 2005). In the late 1980s, rapid political changes in Eastern Europe and the USSR sparked a resurgence of Lithuanian nationalism. Independence was declared in March 1990, but the USSR used economic, political, and military pressure to keep Lithuania within the union. But at that moment radical political changes were more powerful than the Soviet Union‟s wish and after Soviet Communism collapsed in August 1991, the central government granted independence to Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia on September 6. In 1993 Lithuania became the first of three Baltic states to be free from a Russian military presence. Furthermore, all processes of Soviet collapse and independence movement all over the Europe were going on a very rapid speed. Lithuania, as others Baltic countries, were invited in various international organizations, thus proving the acceptance them as free and independent states (Lazdauskas, 2003). Finally, Lithuania was invited to join NATO and European Union as the fullrights member and it could be called as the final and biggest goal.  This short overview of Lithuanian history gave at least very simple understanding about particular Lithuanian experience and relations with its neighbours in international arena. Thus, it is easier to understand topic of the article – how a small state locates in international arena in accordance to cultural, economical and political issues, and how specific fears or other social constructs and transformations appears and grows in Lithuanian mentality.

Dependency in cultural field and identity formation 

Lithuanian cultural field, in which national identity was creating, is undoubtedly influenced by long lasting Russian aggression and later – tried to re-create after joining European Union. So in this sphere Lithuania is not independent as well – in academic field it is widely accepted that national culture or national identities are creating in accordance with other cultures, so it would be a mistake to talk about independence in national identity formation. The article deals with signs in Lithuania culture and identity, which have been left by Russian influence and how it goes together with Europeanization process and efforts to create common European identity. Another important neighbor – Poland, which formed with Lithuania a common state XVI-XVIII centuries, is not included in the article due to wide topic, which may be developed into the new research. Another important thing is that national identity here is not much as legal, political or practical, as it is a cultural one, with emphasis on experiences and expressions of belonging. So in this situation, Lithuania had both impact – from Russia and European Union.  The above mentioned feeling of belonging is characterized by a sense of being “at home, in one place, and not in the other”. Such an identity of belonging is created only when an individual experiences a particular set of life course meanings enabling him or her to belong to a group demarcated from other groups. Over time such everyday relationships become the criteria for national identifications, for a sense of nation-ness (Frykman, 2003). Lithuanian case in this respect is totally different from other European countries, even from other Baltic countries as well. For example, the Central European countries have great experience in ethnic fragmentation, cultural coexistence, national conflicts, different regional, ethnic and national identities, and the corresponding cultural spaces. That region is extremely complex in various aspects: religion, nations, language and in accordance to this has various types of problems due to minorities, toleration, etc. (Bufon, 2007). Lithuania in this respect is one of the greatest examples of cultural and national homogeneous part in all Europe. Despite many years of Russian aggression and continues efforts of russification (XVI-XVIII centuries – polinization), Lithuania managed to create and preserve national identity and culture.  Here one of the hardest periods in Lithuanian history must be mentioned when Russian czar Nicholas I initiated a new policy: the authorities of the occupation began to russify the country with increased speed, and to transform it into a provincial hinterland. Vilnius University and other institutions of higher education were closed, the influence of the Catholic Church was curbed, all Catholic monasteries were closed and the Russian Orthodox Religion was declared as the state religion. Lithuanians were not permitted to purchase land, erect crosses and new churches. From 1864, the Lithuanian language itself and its Latin alphabet were banned and the so-called grazdanka, Lithuanian with the Russian alphabet, was introduced. The cultural life of the country went into a state of paralysis (Randburg, 2009). Lithuania began to recover only towards the end of the 19th century, the period known as the “spring of nations”. A struggle for national culture and reinstitution of writing spread over the greater part of the country. A unique movement, the “book-bearers” came about through selfeducation and a concern for survival. By the way, nationalism with its symbols and rituals had similar kinds of features in many European countries in the 19th century, making it possible to compare nationalism within countries. In Lithuania the project of the creation of the nation, and of the national identity, was the task of the educated upper class (Randburg, 2009). So at that time few well-educated Lithuanian intellectuals understood the importance of Lithuanian roots and traditions and despite hard and oppressions-based period, were eager to find, create and gave over Lithuanian basics to the future generations. So it can be claimed that Russian aggression was some kind of stimulus who “helped” Lithuanians to unite minds, souls and to build nation‟s identity.  Following Lithuanian history further, as it was described above, short independence period after World War I was experienced, but Lithuania got into Russian influence zone once again and later was occupied for 50 years (Anušauskas, 2005). Here must be mentioned historical contradiction – Russia never agreed about occupation fact, and even now claims that Lithuania asked itself to become a part of Soviet Union at that time. Of course, there is no wonder about such manipulations of the Russian position – it is wide known that Russia is often using this manipulation tactic all over the world.  So despite many years of occupation, communism spread, Soviet efforts to change national identity into the common socialist one, many Lithuanians deportations to Siberia, could not fully clear and destroy Lithuanian roots.  National identity question began to arouse general interest, specifically in the 1990s. It was reinforced with certain symbols and rituals. The flag with its yellow, green an red, national holidays and other public occasions created a sense of solidarity, at the same time offering Lithuanians symbolic objects with which to identify.  But the main problem occurred that Lithuanian middle-age generation at that time of regaining independence could not remember independent Lithuania – for them Lithuania, which belonged so many years to Soviet Union, was the only one reality. Of course, many of them were full of dreams and ideal of free Lithuania, which could act freely and independent from Russia. But another thing should be mentioned here – even if in political field Lithuanian were united as never and wished re-establish independence, in cultural or economical field Russia still remained very important actor. It may be confirmed by statistics, that more than 80 percent of Lithuanian nation remembered Russian cartoons, films, events with huge nostalgia – it may also be interpreted as the result of many years implemented propaganda. Even younger generation is able to speak and understand Russian language and mentality nowadays – it is also a mark of Lithuanian nation‟s past.  However, after regaining independence and later even more intensive – after joining European Union, Lithuania was transforming identity once again, but this time construction was not in relation with “others” – Russia, but in accordance with European identity. Here the logical trend occurs that any national identity is reworked over and over again. National identity, like any cultural identity is a process and as such it may be described, but it is not a category whose content ever corresponds to the label. Culture will no longer be presented as a reified, unified whole, but as a complex of viewpoints, relations and values – as is in European Union (Frykman, 1993). The main difference from Russian occupation time in the past and forced identity shift towards Slavic region, nowadays the adoption of a supranational identity such as “European” does not mean the displacement of local or national ones. Indeed, in this structural context of European organization, national identity remained important as a category of belonging significant both to the production of unity and the preservation of differences. In other words, having a national identity is a key component of developing a European identity (Zabusky, 2004). But this process can not be understood too easily – even if identities may change over time, but in general they are relatively static and slow to change and are always dependent on the existence of some picture of the group‟s history and development. In other words, Lithuanians can have a desire to become Europeans as soon as possible, but Russian past can not disappear in one night time. Even postmodern fluidity has made identities changeable and mobile, this process definitely needs time. And this approach sees identification as a construct, a process that is never completed (Ollila, 1998). So here we can find common agreement that each community is a complex and shifting fiction. The difficulty is that values are effective only in the event of consensus. It is assumed that modernization and consequent process of urbanization and population movement result in the breakdown of these communities and the erosion of the value systems that characterize them, which cease to be effective in the new context. For example, it is claimed that if people become Europeans, their identities no longer turn around categories of religion, folk, or national defense but around categories of exchange, difference and value. Unlike belonging to the nation, which has a specific cultural content, identification with Europe is an empty sign. Europe has no Spirit, in the Hegelian sense, since, unlike the nation-state, it does not live off the dead (Bornemanand and Fowler, 1997).   Finally, because Europe can be described as an “empty sign”, it still has possibility to create and form its own values, communities and even – new identities. The EU has an important role to play in supporting and stimulating contacts across borders. Associational life, the voluntary organizations, social movements and ideological organizations together with the municipalities and the regions should be encourages to serve energy for European cooperation between members of the public. These multiple channels connect societies and can be summarized as interstate, transgovernmental, and transnational relations (Keohane and Nye, 2005).  So in this respect it may be noticed extremely great efforts of European Union to create a common sense and common action not only in economics, but in politics and culture as well. But next question arise if we can universalize a specific rationality and neglect historical and national specifities in real life? There was necessary search for the roots of European-ness in history, religion, science and culture, but the question what is considered as European at all, is still not answered. And even – to what extent does the concept of Europe constitute a meaningful object if we can not agree even on a shared definition of Europe?  One of the key questions in future European political-geographical developments is thus to find a new way between convergence and divergence tendencies in the social, cultural, economic and political sphere, the other, to work out if the European programme, which could be summarized in terms of “unity in diversity”, is not only practicable, but also exportable on a worldwide scale. Otherwise, nationalism as a pre-eminent European phenomenon may remain (Bufon, 2007). So here it is a danger that speaking of a single, all-constitutive Europe becomes rather meaningless, or worse, encourages a vision of European-ness as a quality that is somehow fixed, bounded, homogenous and pure. Instead, we should recognize the plurality and diversity of the many different Europe that exist and have existed, in any given time or context.  In this particular case, Lithuania belongs to the same cultural sphere as Europe without any doubts. But, as mentioned earlier, Lithuania has never experienced complicated identity or national culture formation as the rest Europe did or does now. For example, countries, which belong to Balkan region, were extremely divided between themselves in religion, language or nation fields and for this reason managed to create multiple identities. Otherwise, Lithuania was always homogenous in religion, language or nation formation stages, so the only “others” were Russians and in some extent – Poles. So after many years of seeking independence from Russia, Lithuania very soon entered European area, but fear about real effects of the process of European integration on national identity and state sovereignty remains. Lithuania, many years being under the Russian dependence, now is very careful about growing dependence towards European Union. Despite slogan “Unity in diversity” Lithuania remains quite unsure about common European identity perspectives.

Dependency in economic field

The global economy has changed in very significant ways during the past several decades, and these changes are rooted in how the global economy is organized and governed. These transformations affect not only the flows of goods and services across national borders, but also the implications of these processes for how countries move up (or down) in the international system. The development strategies of countries today are affected to an unprecedented degree by how industries are organized: policymakers, managers, workers, social activists, and many other stakeholders need a firm understanding of how the contemporary global economy works if they hope to improve their position in it (Ravenhill, 2008). So it could be stated that we are definitely living in the era of globalization, where global economics is on the top of importance. Over the past 50 years, the EU has achieved remarkable success in harnessing the increasing interconnections arising from globalization and in achieving economic prosperity and stability on a continental scale. The EU has become one of the world‟s key economic engines, accounting for about 30% of global GDP and 20% of global trade flows, while the Euro has emerged as a key international currency (Ravenhill, 2008). As a result, many parts of the world are looking to learn from the EU‟s experience in regional integration.  In order to manage this process of increasing economic and financial inter-dependencies, the European Union maintains economic relations with many countries and institutions in the world. Its ultimate objective is to foster economic prosperity and stability in the EU and, while serving the Union‟s interests, also in the rest of the world by spreading the values and principles of the Union‟s economic framework and policy recommendations to other countries by shaping its external economic policies and their implementation (Vitkus, 2002). So, looking from the present situation it could be interested to find out if Robert Schuman, who took up an idea originally conceived by Jean Monnet and, on 9 May 1950, proposed establishing a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), had a belief in such a successful economical model through all Europe. At that time, in countries which had once fought each other, the production of coal and steel were pooled under a common High Authority. In a practical but also richly symbolic way, the raw materials of war were being turned into instruments of reconciliation and peace (Vitkus, 2002). Indeed, Lithuania at that time was far away from the idea about common and capital-based economy system with other European countries. Instead of this, Soviet Union‟s era brought Lithuania intensive industrialization and economic integration into the common Soviet Union system, although the level of technology and state concern for environmental, health, and labor issues lagged far behind Western standards.  The disadvantages of a centrally planned economy became evident after the collapse of the USSR in 1991, when Lithuania began its transition to a market economy. Owing to the availability of inexpensive natural resources, the industrial sector had become excessively energy intensive, inefficient in its utilization of resources, and incapable of manufacturing internationally competitive products. More than 90% of Lithuania‟s trade was with the rest of the USSR, which supplied Lithuanian industry with raw materials for production and a market for its outputs. The need to sever these trading links and to reduce the inefficient industrial sector led to serious economic difficulties (Grennes, 1994). The process of privatization and the development of new companies slowly moved Lithuania from a command economy toward a free market. By 1998, the economy had survived the early years of uncertainty and several setbacks, including a banking crisis, and seemed poised for solid growth. However, the collapse of the Russian ruble in August 1998 shocked the economy into negative growth and forced the reorientation of trade from Russia toward the West. But lacking important natural resources, it still remained dependent on imports of fuels and raw materials. However now, in economic area, Lithuania maintains dual dependence between European Union and Russia. Despite the fact, that Lithuania still remains totally dependant on Russian gas and oil, it also gets huge financial support from European Union‟s as well. So it seems that Lithuania trusts Europe in economic field and it is a wide spread opinion that Lithuania gain a major security level due to economic relations with Europe (Kavaliauskas, 2003). And, actually, it could be very hard to deny “Old Europe‟s” financial help for developing various Lithuanian sectors: from the beginning, when Lithuania was seeking a membership in the EU, or later in transforming all economic sector, which was totally dependent on Russian market for years. So it could seem that Lithuania should be grateful to other European states, which provided a major economic support and in this respect gave Lithuania second chance to develop national economic further, towards West. But there occurs some negative economical aspects as well – Lithuanian income levels still lags behind those of older EU members. Lower wages and high income taxes may have been factors that contributed to the trend of emigration to the wealthiest EU countries after Lithuania joined the European Union in 2004. Another fact, which was widely manipulated in all political debates – that initial Euro adoption date of January 1, 2007 was postponed due to the high inflation rate of 2006. And this all was dependent only on European position and interpretation.Indeed, economic policy is primarily a national responsibility, even if the Treaty declares that it should be regarded “as a matter of common concern” and coordinated within the Council. The Europe was also accused of manipulating economical support to Lithuania in order to ensure political loyalty with “Old Europe” states – primary with France and Germany. Dominant states may try to secure much the same result by using overall economic power to affect results on other issues. If only economic objectives are at stake, they may succeed: money, after all, is fungible. But the problem is that economic objectives have political implications, and economic linkage by the strong is limited by domestic, transnational and trans-governmental actors who resist having their interest trade off (Kavaliauskas, 2003). But positive aspects can not be denied as well – EU as envisioned by the business world is a single, free and open market, so enlargement has opened up new markets and the Baltic region may develop into one of Europe‟s most dynamic and creative regions. In addition to enlargement, employment and the environment will be the other areas of priority. The government has highlighted the goal set of creating the most dynamic and competitive knowledge-based economy in the world with sustainable economic growth, more and better jobs and greater social cohesion (Ravenhill, 2008). The government also underlines the considerable added value represented by EU cooperation in the context of safeguarding the environment and promoting sustainable development.  Of course, even nowadays, Russia has a special place in Lithuanian economical system. As mentioned earlier, Lithuania remains hardly dependant on raw-materials, which are imported from Russia, especially gas and oil. Other business ties also has strengthened – among more than 160 foreign trade partners of Lithuania, Russia ranked first in terms of trade turnover, imports and exports during the first quarter of year 2008. This situation raises many debates within Lithuanian government. For example, the opposition leader also took the opportunity to blast his political opponents over their inability to “defend [the country] against Russia‟s influence”. This criticism was forwarded at former President and Prime Minister Algirdas Brazauskas, Labor Party head Viktor Upaskich and Order and Justice Party head Rolandas Paksas. In one particular case – former president and the leader of the Order and Justice party Rolandas Paksas, who became the only president who has been ousted from the leading state position in Lithuania by impeachment, is a real fact of state‟s shame. And, by the way, this fact of “selling” Lithuanian national interests to Russia was proved by the court (The Baltic Times, 2008). So it is just one example of how economics and politics are related and inter-dependent in Lithuanian case. Nowadays Lithuania is experiencing another difficult situation following the decommissioning of Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant. Of course, there is no doubt that due to EU documents Lithuania should close Ignalina‟s Nuclear Power Plant despite fact, that country is not ready for this action. Furthermore, changing geopolitical situation requires assess challenges to energy security or supply diversification and expressed hope that an appropriate solution would be found in cooperation with EU members and institutions. And this cooperation should ensure that no space for Russian manipulation due to energetic field is left in Lithuania. Finally, Lithuania also fears that Russia would impose sanctions on the country for its strong response to the Georgian crisis. Being a large, ambitious and aggressive country, Russia could use all possible measures of political and economic pressure considering Lithuania‟s dependence on Russia in terms of energy resources and raw materials, Lithuanians would probably face the whole set of their measures. Public opinion also stresses that the EU-Russia relations prospects must be seriously discussed on the basis of principles of the international law and European values. Lithuania here also stands as a mediator for European – Russian dialogue and this is the reason why mutual interdependence remains.
Dependency in political field Foreign policy and political field in general – this applies particularly to countries with small populations – should be unified, principled and consistent. Foreign policy is a much more complex area for small countries than it is for large ones. Large, strong countries with ample populations are much more resistant than small countries, especially those small countries with larger neighbors (Lithuanian – Russian relations, as an example). The leading foreign policy decision-makers of large, strong countries behave as very important personalities – their decisions have major impact on other countries, but considerably less on their own. If anything happens to harm their countries, they are able to call on other recourses, military included, to assist them. The position enjoyed by politicians that work in the sphere of foreign policy in a small country is completely different. It is clear that any politician from a small country is likely to be very weak in comparison with his/her counterpart from a large country or from a great power (Kunic, 2008). In the article investigation how Lithuania bends to break this trend is presented.  So it may be claimed that relations with neighbors are of primary importance of small country. This requires the greatest attention, and politics as a whole must be directed towards ensuring good relations with them. When ones consider relations with a neighboring country, one has to realize that such relations are not created merely through direct bilateral activities, but that a decisive role is played by one‟s relations with that country‟s friends and enemies. So the question of whom we have good relations with, who our solid strategic allies are, is therefore extremely important. This is not the “balance of power” policy practised by strong countries. This is the pragmatic, flexible policy of small countries, obliged to secure their long-term survival (Kunic, 2008).  Here it could be interesting to give an example from practical field – real life. Particular connections between three states are mentioned further. For example, Lithuania, Belarus and Ukraine all began from more or less the same starting point. After the Soviet Union collapsed, all post-Soviet states were quite dependent economically on Russia. Despite that, all three were relatively advanced economically compared to other nations in the former Soviet Union, so they seemed the best prepared to make an economic transition to independent statehood (Drwecki, 2008). For nationalists in all three countries, Russia was the historical “Other”, the nation against which they had to defend themselves. All considered Russia a threat, not so much because they feared a military invasion over their borders, but rather because they dreaded any repercussions of economic dependence on Russia. This is again contradicted by the actions of Lithuania: Lithuania looked westward even though it was still dependent on Russia for 94 percent of its oil and 100 percent of its gas and at that time was the only from these countries, which was brave enough to choose this kind of future direction (Kavaliauskas, 2003). So it is obvious that nowadays, in a shrinking or global world, it is very hard to divide boundaries between economics and politics. Any events in one field suddenly could affect another field and cause unpredictable results. Economical and political fields are extremely contradictory in Lithuanian relations with European Union and Russia. For example, despite economical and financial support from European Union, Lithuania often contradicts dominant EU political position and this trend brings many various discussions not only between EU countries, but within Lithuanian society as well. Another challenge to European order was when Lithuania has rejected a proposed compromise which would have paved the way for talks on an EU-Russia partnership deal to begin. Lithuania, a former Soviet republic, complained that not all of its concerns had been addressed by the EU presidency, currently held by Slovenia. Lithuania in this respect presented strong position and demands, which centre on safeguards over a pipeline which transports oil from Russia through Ukraine and Belarus to Europe. Lithuania has also expressed concern about Russian policy towards Georgia and Moldova (Mite, 2008). This situation also proves that foreign affairs agendas – that is, sets of issues relevant to foreign policy with which governments are concerned – have become larger and more diverse. No longer can all issues be subordinated to military security as Secretary of State Kissinger correctly described the situation in 1975: “Progress in dealing with the traditional agenda is no longer enough. A new and unprecedented kind of issue has emerged. The problems of energy, recourses, environment, population, the usage of space and the seas now rank with questions of military security, ideology and territorial rivalry which have traditionally made up the diplomatic agenda” (Keohane and Nye, 2005). So it may be noticed how characteristic the overlap of domestic and foreign policy is among developed pluralist countries. Agendas may be influenced strongly by the considerations of the overall balance of power. Political scientists have traditionally emphasized the role of military force in international politics. Force dominates other means of power: if there is no constrains on one‟s choice of instruments, the state with superior military force may prevail. If the security dilemma for all states were extremely acute, military force, supported by economic and other resources, would clearly be the dominant source of power. Survival is the primary goal of all states, and in the worst situations, force is ultimately necessary to guarantee survival. Thus military force is always a central component of national power – and Russia proved it once again with Georgian case. Such military power may still be used politically. Each superpower continues to use the threat of force to deter attacks by the other superpower on itself or its allies; its deterrence ability thus serves an indirect, protective role, which it may be used in bargaining on other issues with its allies. In this way a state may be used that force positively – to gain political influence (Keohane and Nye, 2005).  So Lithuania, small and homogenous Baltic country, still needs to find its own place in a contemporary world, which is shrinking in terms of culture, economy and politics. This wide net of dependence and inter-dependence relations causes new challenges for all countries and other social groups in every day life, so it is important to make a right decision about future trends and perspectives. And this issue is even more important for small states, as Lithuania is.

Conclusions

The article briefly touched globalization process, which created extremely intensive dependency and inter-dependency relations and connections all over the world. In this case, European Union could be one of such examples when interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations created a wide net not only between it members, but also with other parts of the world. And there is no doubt that this process has effects on various types of fields: on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies around the world. In this particular article, Lithuanian example presents inter-dependency situation, where Lithuania stands in the middle between European Union on one side and Russia on the other. This complicated position is viewed from three, probably the most important positions: dependency in cultural, economical and political fields. So here short provision of an accurate analysis of the issues and controversies regarding globalization is presented. From the cultural field, controversial Lithuanian situation is portrayed: despite a fact, that Lithuania was creating its national identity in relation with historical “others”, who were  Russians (and in some extent – Poles) – the nation against which Lithuanians had to defend themselves, now  Lithuania belongs to the same cultural sphere as Europe without any doubts. After gaining independence and especially – after joining European Union, Lithuania was pushed to transform its national identity once again towards Western world or, in other words – towards common European identity formation. However, due to Lithuanian homogenous status in religion, language and nation, and because of the extremely vital fear to disappear as a small nation – Lithuania now is very suspicious about growing dependence towards European Union. In short, despite slogan “Unity in diversity” Lithuania remains quite unsure about common European identity perspectives. In the economical field, Lithuania also stands in the middle between European Union and Russia. Due to globalization and common trends in the world system, the global economy has changed in very significant ways during the past several decades. Through this time, over the past 50 years, the European Union has achieved remarkable success in harnessing the increasing interconnections and in achieving economic prosperity and stability on a continental scale. But even in this context, Lithuania maintains dual inter-dependence between European Union and Russia: despite the fact, that Lithuania still remains totally dependent on Russian gas and oil, it gets huge financial support from European Union as well. So it seems that Lithuania trusts Europe in economic field, but the problem appears when economic objectives are consolidated in order to have further political implications. Finally, in the political field, Lithuania has chosen the most controversial position. As a member of the European Union, which got a major financial and political support to develop a country, Lithuania used to present quite strong position and demands to Europe when question comes to Russian issues. Lithuania was the first country in European Union, who at the same time being very dependent on Russian oil and gas, was not scared to block European-Russian partnership dialogue due to aggressive Russian policy towards Georgia.  So Lithuania, small and homogenous Baltic country, still needs to find its own place in a contemporary world, which is shrinking in terms of culture, economy and politics. This wide net of dependence and inter-dependence relations causes new challenges for all countries and other social groups in every day life, so it is important to make a right decision about future trends and perspectives. And this issue is even more important for small states, as it is for Lithuania. Unfortunately, as current world‟s political situation showed, it is very difficult to make static conclusions, so only in the near future we could reasonable valuate present events and choices which were made.

References

1. Anušauskas A. (2005). Lietuva 1940–1990: okupuotos Lietuvos istorija. Vilnius.
2. Bornemanand J., Fowler N. (1997). Europeanization. Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 26.
3. Bumblauskas A. (2005). Senosios Lietuvos istorija, 1009 – 1795. Vilnius, R. Paknio leidykla.
4. Bufon M. (2007). Nationalism and globalization: a Central European perspective. Avaliable at: http://www.theslovenian.com/articles/bufon.pdf.
5. Croucher S. L. (2003). Globalization and belonging – the politics of identity in a changing world. New York, Rowman & Littlefield.
6. Drwecki A. (2008). The Reconstruction of Nations Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569–1999. Available at: www.ceeol.com
7. Frykman J. (1993). Becoming a perfect nation: modernity, body politics and national processes in Twentieth-century Sweden. Ethnos, Vol. 58.
8. Grennes T. (1994). The Lithuanian economy in transition. Lithuanian quarterly journal of arts and sciences. Vol. 40. No. 2.
9. Kacowicz A. M. (1998). Regionalization, globalization and nationalism: covergent, divergent or overlapping? Globalisms and Regionalisms. University of Oslo, Norway.
10. Kavaliauskas T. (2003). Lietuvos politinė dvasia, kultūra ir kasdienybė. Kultūros Barai, No. 10.
11. Kelly R. E. (2007). Security Theory in the „New Regionalism‟. International Studies review. Blackwell Publishing.
12. Keohane R. O., Nye J. S. (2005). Realism and complex interdependence. “Power and interdependence”. Boston, Little, Brown and Company, 3rd edition.
13. Kunic  J. (2008). Slovenian foreign policy- expectations and reality. Five minutes of democracy: the image of Slovenia after 2004. Ljubljana: The liberal academy.
14. Lazdauskas A. (2003). Lithuania and Russia: A Decade of Relations  Lithuania in the world. Available at: http://www.liw.lt/archive_vid.php?shid=1066993100&id=1066990569
15. Mite V. (2008). Lietuva blokuoja ES sutarti su Rusija. Available at:  http://www.geopolitika.lt/?artc=2054
16. Ollila A. (1998). Perspectives to Finnish identity. Scandinavian Journal of History, Vol 23, No. 3-4, 1st September.
17. Potter R. P., Binns T., Elliott J. A., Smith D. (2004). Geographies of development. Pearson Education Limited, Harlow.
18. Randburg (2008). From ancient times to World War I. Available at: http://www.randburg.com/li/general/general_7.html
19. Ravenhill J. (2008). Global political economy. New York, Oxford university press.
20. The Baltic times (2008). Kubilius: Russian investment a threat to national security. Available at: http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/21292/
21. Tucker V. (1999). The myth of development: a critique of a Eurocentric discourse. Critical development theory: contributions to a new paradigm. Edited by Munck R. and O‟Hearn D. Zed Books, London and New York.
22. Viegnes M. (2005). The French Vision of the Europe from Victor Hugo‟s United States of Europe. Available at: http://www.ejop.org/archives/2005/11/the_french_visi.html
23. Vitkus G. (2002). Europos Sąjunga: enciklopedinis žodynas. Vilnius, Eugrimas.
24. Zabusky S. E. (2004). Boundaries at work: discourses and practises of belonging in the European Space Agency. An anthropology of the European Union: building, imagining and experiencing the New Europe. Edited by Bellier I., Wilson T. M. New York.

]]> http://scholararticles.net/dependency-and-inter-dependency-in-a-shrinking-world-lithuanian-experience-between-the-european-union-and-russia/feed/ 0 http://scholararticles.net/scientific-and-technological-advance-globalization-and-impact-of-national-policies/ http://scholararticles.net/scientific-and-technological-advance-globalization-and-impact-of-national-policies/#comments Tue, 18 Nov 2008 10:43:44 +0000 http://dev.scholararticles.net/?p=81 Podoski K. B., Žilionis V. (2008). Scientific and technological advance: globalization and impact of national policies. Global Academic Society Journal: Social Science Insight, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 15-24. ISSN 2029-0365. [www.ScholarArticles.net]

Download/print: *.pdf

Authors:

Kristina B. Podoski, University of Southern Maine, USA
Vaidas Žilionis, Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania

Abstract

The paper aims to overview dynamics of scientific and technological advance and to analyse impact of national science and technology policies on country’s progress. The paper deals with literature on science and technology advance including reciprocity of science and technology. It analyses taxonomy of the globalisation of technology, current trends of scientific and technological advance in the context of globalization as well most probable scenario of international business changes in relation to development of science and technology.  Impact of governmental policy on scientific and technological advance is analysed in the paper. Researches of such scholars as Feeley (2002), Lemola (2002), Nayyar (2002), Archibugi and Lundvall (2002), Scherer and Harhoff (2003), Stiglitz (2003) and Stubbs (2007) form foundation of the paper. The analysis reveals main stakeholders, trends and means of government intervention regarding the science and technology progress.

Introduction 

The scientific and technological progress is often named as a key mover of mankind’s development. While technology advance is clearly evidenced in everyday life, scientific research is what actually stands behind it. Lemola (2002) describes science and technology policy as collective measures taken by a government in order, on the one hand, to encourage the development of scientific and technical research (policy for science and technology) and, on the other hand, to exploit the results for general political objectives (policy through science and technology).  In several advanced countries over the past decade, direct state support for science and technology has tended to decline. This arises in part from economic downturns, budget stringency, and a general desire among governments to avoid increasing taxation, but also reflects the sentiment that since industry at large benefits from technological progress, some of its social benefits are internalized in the sector (Stubbs, 2007).  Despite of diminishing scope of direct state support, science and technology policies are crucial factor for science and technology advance in many countries. Therefore, the paper aims to overview dynamics of scientific and technological advance and to analyse impact of national science and technology policies on country’s progress.

Reciprocity of science and technology

The scientific and technological progress is often named as a key mover of mankind’s development. While technology advance is clearly evidenced in everyday life, scientific research is what actually stands behind it.  Scientific literature offers wide variety of concepts and definitions of “technology” term. According to Bozeman (2000), technology may be defined as (1) the science or study of the practical industrial arts; (2) the terms used in a science, technical terminology; (3) the applied science. Technology Education Federation of Australia (1999) quotes UNESCO, the United Nations Education, Social and Cultural Organisation, which defines technology as: “…the know-how and creative processes that may assist people to utilise tools, resources and systems to solve problems and to enhance control over the natural and made environment in an endeavour to improve the human condition”. Vengrauskas and Perminienė (2002) maintain that technology means appliance of raw materials and processes for development of a certain product. According to National Academy of Engineering (2008), technology is the process by which humans modify nature to meet their needs and wants. Referring to this source, as technology includes the entire infrastructure necessary for the design, manufacture, operation, and repair of technological artefacts (such as engineering know-how, manufacturing expertise, and various technical skills), it may be considered as a product of engineering and science. Moreover, the knowledge and processes used to create and to operate these technological artefacts are equally important part of technology. Reciprocity of the science and technology are also field of concern of many scholars. For instance, according to Meyer (2000), basic research, or science, produces a number of scientific research papers, while technology is materialized mostly through patents. This author offers two approaches for analysing connections between science and technology: (a) the linear interpretation and (b) the two-way interpretation. Figure 1 clearly illustrates the differences between these two approaches. Copyright symbols © in this scheme indicate basic research, and symbol for registered trade-marks ® here symbolises patented technology.

Figure 1. Approaches to reciprocity of science and technology: (A) Linear interpretation (B) Two-way interpretation (Meyer, 2000)

As depicted in Figure 1, linear interpretation represents that the increasing number of scientific research papers cited in patents documents strengthens connection “between the areas of science on the one hand, and technology on the other”. Meanwhile the two-way interpretation contrasts this simplified interpretation by a more complex view of the relationship between scientific papers and patents (Meyer, 2000). As overview of scholar literature shows, the two concepts of science and technology cannot be distinguished easily, as they are tightly interrelated. Therefore, further in this paper these two terms are used jointly in order to receive the full picture.

Scientific and technological advance in globalization context: present trends and future forecasts

In the end of the last century, processes of globalization were influenced by several interrelated factors: advanced information and communication technologies, lower transportation costs, corporate strategies oriented towards customer needs, exploitation of technological and organizational advantages, trade liberalization and financial flows, etc. As a result, structure of international business has developed intensely during the last decades.  Deroukakis (2000) emphasises that over the past twenty years the world has experienced a fundamental transformation in the nature of the international economy. As one of the most important factors of changes in dynamics of global competition, this author mentions rapid implementation of new technology. Fink et al. (2002) also highlight that discussions of the causes of growth in world trade in the last quarter of the 20th century frequently cite technological progress in telecommunications and associated declines in communication costs as an important contributor. These authors refer to Krugman and Venables, who argued that the emergence of international production networks has been driven by improved communication links that facilitated the coordination of geographically dispersed production processes. In the light of these changes, globalisation of technology may be analysed one of the most important factors. Archibugi and Pietrobelli (2003) offer taxonomy of the globalisation of technology, which is a useful tool for analysing role and forms of performance of various private and public bodies in international exploitation of nationally produced technology, the global generation of innovation and global technological collaborations (see Table 1).

Continue of the Table 1:

Table 1. Taxonomy of the globalisation of technology (Archibugi and Pietrobelli, 2003)

Meanwhile, Alborovienė (2002) defines five trends of scientific and technological advance that prevail in developed countries in the context of globalization (see Table 2).

Table 2. Trends of scientific and technological advance (according to Alborovienė, 2002)

Reflections on these five trends can be found in other scholars’ works as well. Below, overview of literature regarding to the most important trends is provided. While speaking of rapidity of technological advance, Binswanger (2001) stresses that one of the most important aspects of technological progress is the increased efficiency of both: working time and consumption time. According to Deroukakis (2000), rapid implementation of new technology – i.e. advance in communications and transportation technology – has erased borders and shrunk distances, thus leading to fundamental changes in business organization and techniques. Binswanger (2001) agrees with Deroukakis (2000) and maintains that technologies stand for mobility. He also states that there is a time-saving innovation in transportation technology. Deroukakis (2000) places more highlight on business and maintains that revolutionary changes in the organization and technology of production (including faster product cycles) are further hastening the transformation of domestic economies. Fink et al. (2002) cite Spinanger, who reports evidence from a survey of 14 major textiles and clothing producers in Hongkong (with activities throughout Asia and around the world), which identifies the quality of Telecom infrastructure as a key factor in decisions on export-oriented foreign direct investment-more important than policies affecting trade and investment, labour costs, and education and training of workers.  Unlimited potential of innovations is especially emphasised by Alborovienė (2002), who maintains that progress of science and technology makes substantial impact on company’s product creation, its development, and manufacturing since each scientific achievement may result in new products and creation of new needs. This author highlights that emergence of new technologies is often related to downfall of the old ones, which frequently creates threat not only to a certain product, but to its producers and even entire industries as well.  As regards the last trend – increasing governmental regulation of technical advance – Sanz-Menéndez and Cruz-Castro (2005) offers exhaustive analysis of importance of regional government (in contrast to national one) in drawing and implementing science, technology and innovation policies. Binswanger (2001) also stresses importance of science and technology in ensuring sustainable development. According to this author, technology is supposed to help people in promoting a society where it is possible to keep our present standard of life or even increase it while at the same time using less resources and especially less energy.  Under the influence of the above-mentioned trends, the IEBM Handbook of International Business (1999) forecasts that in the future economic relations will develop between the trading blocks rather than separate countries. In this environment, bilateral and trilateral transactions, business companies will join into strategic alliances, which will help them to integrate into global economy.  Thus international business has strong links with scientific and technological advance. Scientific technological progress is related not only with creation, development and manufacturing of products, but also with improved business management systems, supply chain, logistics and international payments.  Basing on Delphi study conducted with a set of experts drawn from the policy, business and academic communities, Czinkota and Ronkainen (2005) forecast changes in the international business environment over the next decade and the impact of these changes on policy and on corporate practices. These authors predict that consumers increasingly will ignore superior technology for the sake of technological compatibility and comfort. It will therefore be imperative to offer innovation with an “irresistible functionality”. Major emphasis, these authors forecast, will fall on “a move from what is technically possible to what is highly desired by consumers”. They also predict new market opportunities for environment-friendlier technologies.  Among other changes, Czinkota and Ronkainen (2005) foresee that in the nearest decade, governments will directly support the emergence of new technology with measures such as tax incentives and fuel standards. The increasing influence of governmental policies on the development of science and technologies is highlighted by many authors as they consider that successful development of country’s scientific and technological environment requires effective national science and technology policy. Below, impact of governmental policies on scientific and technological advance is analysed with more detail.

Impact of governmental science and technology policy on scientific and technological advance 

According to Feeley (2002), the underlying governmental policy goals associated with science and technology policy include military, commercial, and environmental goals and the advancement of knowledge, among others. Lemola (2002) maintains that science and technology policy “is determined by the idea of a deliberate integration of scientific and technological activities into the fabric of political, economic, military and social decisions”.  Stubbs (2007) proposes that technology policy seeks to create productive capability, which often requires public sponsorship. Therefore, according to Scherer and Harhoff (2003), science and technology policy can defend creation of new technology from market failure. According to Nayyar (2002), forces regulating technology and investment flows “support greater economic integration driven by free market forces and provide level playing fields for all participants regardless of their size and competitive abilities”. Stubbs (2007) maintains that governments, being able to consider longer-term benefits from the social rather than private point of view, can pool the risks. He stresses that the funding of much basic research in most countries is a government responsibility.  As Stiglitz (2003) put it, one of government’s oughts should be to support a broad intellectual infrastructure. This author highlights that education, especially advanced education and research institutions have the key role in this task. As Feeley (2002) describes, universities and national laboratories are the recipients of governing funding and act as main incubators of scientific ideas from the drawing board through development. Meanwhile, business concerns have also important stakes in science and technology policy, as government contracts for their services are major source of corporate revenue and income. Stiglitz (2003) emphasises importance of close links between the research institutions and the education institutions and industry, i.e. to take the ideas being produced in the universities and translate them into products that have global market reach. Archibugi and Lundvall (2002) give example of reallocation of academically trained workers towards small- and medium-sized firms for formation of networks with universities and other knowledge institutions.  Apart from universities and corporations, Feeley (2002) describes other constituency groups that are involved in science and technology policy, namely advocacy groups, and the general public. They also play significant roles in decisions concerning science and technology policy. In different circumstances, as Feeley (2002) notes, these individual constituencies can be rallied to bolster the prospects for, or against, individual science and technology issues, policies, or programs.  According to Stiglitz (2003), government intervention is necessary for taking into account the full range of benefits that arise from research; it should focus explicitly on projects where it is hoped there are large externalities. Archibugi and Lundvall (2002) describe that science and technology policy needs to support incremental innovation and the upgrading of competence untraditional industries as well as the formation and growth of high technology industries. However, Stiglitz (2003) highlights importance of competitive selection of research projects and use of peer reviews in order to avoid favouritism and other kinds of inefficiencies and distortions.  Finally, Stiglitz (2003) emphasises advantages of broad-based policies and strategies as compared with narrowly focused strategies striving to ensure that the research strategies are designed by a wide spectrum of special interest groups. Therefore, Stubbs (2007) highlights significant advantages of EU science and technology policy in contrast to national policies of European countries.  Although recently direct state support for science and technology has tended to decline in several advanced countries, importance of science and technology policies, as catalyst for interinstitutional cooperation and guarantee for science-and-technology-friendly environment, remains evident. It is probable that government-supported initiatives will sustain and be followed-up in the future. For instance, collaborative networks of science and technology advance might continue their work without external (governmental) support.

Conclusions

1. Close interrelation between science and technology is obvious and may be confirmed by scholar researches on the topic. Scientific-technological environment makes substantial impact not only on company’s product creation, its development, and manufacturing, but also on business management systems, supply chain, logistics, international payments, etc. Analysis of taxonomy of the globalisation of technology helps to identify roles and forms of performance of various private and public bodies in international exploitation of nationally produced technology, the global generation of innovation and global technological collaborations. Science and technology advance enables efficiency of working time as well as consumption time. International exploitation of nationally produced innovations, global generation of innovations and global techno-scientific collaborations are possibilities to gain competitive advantage to companies in global market.
2. The major trends of scientific and technological advance include rapidity of technological advance, unlimited potential of innovations, increased assignations for scientific researches and construction works, small improvements of products as well as increasing governmental regulation of technical advance. For evaluating dynamics of scientific and technological advance, analysis of current trends is not enough. Among the most probable scenarios of international business changes in relation to development of science and technology, increasing influence of governmental policies on the development of science and technologies is highlighted by many authors
3. Effective national science and technology policy can affect not only one company’s profitability but also stimulate development of all country’s economy. Impact of governmental science and technology policy on scientific and technological advance involves protection of research projects from market failure, encouraged share of scientific and technological achievements and cooperation between business bodies as well as research centres, universities, public institutions, etc. Diminishing direct state support for science and technology will most likely transfer the initiative onto the shoulders of private companies in the future.

References

1. Alborovienė (2002) Prekybos marketingas. Vilnius, p. 80.
2. Archibugi D., Lundvall B. A. (2002) The Globalizing learning economy. Oxford University Press, p. 326.
3. Archibugi D., Pietrobelli C. (2003) The globalisation of technology and its implications for developing countries: Windows of opportunity or further burden? Technological Forecasting & Social Change, No. 70, pp. 861883
4. Binswanger M. (2001) Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect? Ecological Economics, No. 36, pp. 119-132.
5. Bozeman B. (2000) Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, No. 29, pp. 627-655.
6. Czinkota M. R., Ronkainen I. A. (2005) A forecast of globalization, international business and trade: report from a Delphi study. Journal of World Business, No. 40, pp. 111-123.
7. Deroukakis (2000) Performance-based Codes – Impact on International Trade. Inter-Jurisdictional Regulatory Collaboration Committee, p. 10. Available at: http://www.ircc.gov.au/pdf/Impact_on_International_ Trade.pdf.
8. Feeley T. J. (2002) The Multiple Goals of Science and Technology Policy. Policy Dynamics, pp. 125154.
9. Fink C., Mattoo A., Neagu I.C. (2002) Assessing the Impact of Communication Costs on International Trade. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2929.
10. Lemola T. (2002) Convergence of national science and technology policies: the case of Finland. Research Policy, No. 31, pp. 1481-1490.
11. Meyer M. (2000) Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, No. 29, pp. 409-434.
12. National Academy of Engineering (2008) What is technology. Available at: http://www.nae.edu/nae/techlithome.nsf/weblinks/KGRG-55A3ER.
13. Nayyar D. (2002) Governing Globalization: Issues and Institutions. Oxford University Press, p. 408.
14. Sanz-Menéndez L., Cruz-Castro L. (2005) Explaining the science and technology policies of regional governments. Unidad de Politicas Comparadas (CSIC) Working paper 05-10. Available at: http://www.iesam.csic.es/doctrab2/dt-0510.pdf.
15. Scherer F. M., Harhoff D. (2003) Taking Technical Risks: How Innovators, Executives, and Investors Manage High-Tech Risks. MIT Press, p.220.
16. Stiglitz J. E. (2003) Globalization, Technology, and Asian Development. Asian Development Review, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 1-18.
17. Stubbs P. (2007) Science and Technology Policy. The Economics of the European Union: Policy and Analysis, pp. 130-170.
18. Technology Education Federation of Australia (1999) What is Technology Education? Available at: http://www.pa.ash.org.au/tefa/wite.html.
19. The IEBM Handbook of International Business (1999). Edited by R. L. Tung, p. 893.
20. Vengrauskas V., Perminienė N. (2002) Tarptautinis verslas. Kaunas, p. 186.

Download/print: *.pdf.

Author:

Jūratė Rusteikienė, Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania

Abstract
The paper analyses globalization as a phenomenon, which affects all spheres of life including urban development and expansion. It gives theoretical overview on urban development issues in the context of globalization and regionalization and presumable global changes in the context of competition of European cities. The aim of the paper is to analyse aspects of urban globalization in the context of political, economical and socio-cultural changes.   The paper gives insight on impact of globalization on political changes, bringing great attention to shifting power from nation states to city governments. Issues of economic development of cities in the context of globalization, including creative competitiveness of cities, are revealed in the paper as well.  Cultural, social and other spheres of life are also integral part of urban development. The paper considers both: positive and negative aspects of globalization concerning the urban development.

Introduction

With development of technologies and increase of human mobility, impact of globalization becomes more and more appreciable. According to Grigas (2002), the essential feature of modern civilization is increasingly speeding globalization of mankind: universal modernization of living conditions, spread of modern technologies and consumption as well as approximation of nations and states. Thus, phenomenon of globalization conditions changes in political, economical, cultural, social and other spheres. Therefore, term “globalization” became popular in all spheres, including urban development.  The aim of the paper is to analyse aspects of urban globalization in the context of political, economical, socio-cultural changes. Thus, this paper explores how globalization determines political, economical, socio-cultural changes and how it influences urban development and expansion. Globalization is an aggregate of unpredictable processes. Therefore, it is difficult to control; it unlocks new forms of risk that affect all of us (Giddens, 2005). Frequently, globalization is defined as opportunity to diminish or eliminate differences between the international and national, the global and local. Effects of globalization might be proved by economic parameters: multinational corporations, global trade, workforce and academic mobility, openness of financial markets, mass media and electronic communications, internationalization of corporate strategies, global consumption models, weakening power of national governments.  Besides, globalization becomes important dimension of education and science and their policies, striving to adjust systems of education and science for competitive growth and transfer of knowledge (Glosienė, 2007). Globalization suggests that we increasingly live in “one world“, thus strengthening interdependency among the individuals their groups and nations (Giddens, 2005).  Globalization means that new types of interactions emerge: economic relationship between transnational companies and national ones, intergovernmental relationship, relationship between transnational organizations (Matakas and Setkauskis, 2004). The major dynamics of the globalization are rapid evolution of technologies and their pervasion, which opens the gateway for unrestricted sally of capital and financial transactions in all directions (Krikštopaitis, 2002). Although economic forces are integral part of globalization, assumption that only they cause this phenomenon would be fallacious. Globalization is built on various political, social, cultural and economical factors (Giddens, 2005). Thus, globalization is considered as a complex phenomenon of evolution of social life, which encompass not only economical, but also political, technological, cultural, military, ecologic and other spheres (Juščius, 2007). In the era of globalization, it becomes increasingly difficult draw the line separating local, national and international spheres of policy, as well as distinguishing economics (Matakas and Setkauskis, 2004).  According to Giddens (2005), globalization is conditioned by advance of technology and infrastructure. Globalization is also moved forward by integration of global economy. Globalization is a form of progress of modern economy, and because of this, it is uncontrollable. Participation in globalization process ensures development of trade, spread of technologies and innovations, provides opportunities to expand markets and to participate in exchange of knowledge and experience; in short, it allows expanding and developing production and increasing welfare (Čičinskas , 2002). Despite this, Giddens (2005) maintains that globalization creates threats, inequalities and challenges, which cross the state boarders and this way slip out of the control of current political structures. Hence separate governments do not have measures for overcoming these transnational problems, there is a need for new global forms of management, which would facilitate universal solutions of the global problems.

Urban development in the context of globalization and regionalization

In line with the globalization, regionalization process, which might seem opposite to globalization, takes place. Rise of regionalism in global economy shows diminishing role of traditional national state, i.e. increasingly important role is attributed to the cities. Mutually interrelated processes of diminishing influence of national state and rise of regionalism correspond to changes in political and social economic perspective, moving from national to regional scale. Regions (cities) ensure potential of active strategic development at local level. They strive to occupy their niche in the global economy, develop their strategies, organize and mobilize themselves and finally create their future based on high technologies (Bagdzevičienė and Vasiliauskaitė, 2004).  Globalization is so important that it has touched nearly all significant cities, thus causing international division of labour and other processes in the field of production and social regulation. The result of these processes is emergence of so called “global cities” (Šaparauskas, 2004). It can be stated that in the age of globalization, cities possess and manage infrastructure, including physical, communicational, production and human factors necessary for promotion of innovations, manufacturing and training (Bagdzevičienė and Vasiliauskaitė, 2004). However, as every social process, globalization is not only positive but also negative phenomenon. It manifests in indisputable hazards in respect of nature, traditional human culture, its diversity and especially of culture’s spiritual component, including traditional values that raised European civilization (Grigas, 2002). Future of the cities is highly dependent on their capabilities to realize global trends and to react to them appropriately (Piliutytė, 2007). Piliutytė (2005) defines four most probable global changes in the context of competition of European cities (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Presumable global changes in the context of competition of European cities (according to Piliutytė (2005))

Globalization as a phenomenon, which affects all spheres of life, including urban development and expansion, is an important factor that should be considered within urban strategic plans.

Impact of globalization on political changes 

Trends of globalization influence all governments and their policies in the world. Functions and role of nation states and their institutions are diminishing. Government have not measures to regulate economics anymore, because it has not enough financial and mobility power to compete with large companies. Globalization restricts state’s independence and implementation of foreign policy goals, however as a counterbalance, it provides new opportunities. Technological advance, which is applied in the market and spurred by it, provides more opportunities for citizens of the countries participating in global economy to benefit from the global diversity and results of economic growth (Vareikis, 2003). As processes of globalization become more evident, cities become most dynamic centres of global level economic transformation. In the world of competition, where capital and professionals are free and unrestricted, cities begin actively applying entrepreneurial and internationally-oriented policy in order to strengthen their competitiveness that leads to emergence of competitive cities and creation of new mode for urban government. New geography of Europe, which ignores national boundaries, emerges. Global changes of recent years prompt development of open and decentralized societies, thus giving new meaning to the localities, territories and cities. These new challenges force localities to create new development strategies in the context of constantly increasing complexity, openness, competitiveness, uncertainty and rapid changes and determine establishment of new approach to the extent of state management. In the era of globalization, role and functional structure of national government changes in many spheres. Global economy strengthens role of the local level, i.e. cities become centres of global control. Forces of globalization stimulate versatile social – spatial transformation and shift of space and state dimension, in which reorganization of state and society is displayed. While role of state diminishes, role and power of local (of a region or a city) government strengthen (Piliutytė, 2007). Frequently, in conditions of globalization strong national bodies become more powerful and frail ones become even weaker (Guogis, 2004). While nation state transmits a fair share of its power to local and regional level, i.e. cities, it strives to gain maximum benefit from globalization at levels, where expression of globalization processes are the most active. Cities become centre of territorization in spread of flows. Thus, an activity is totally territorized when its economic power is embedded in values (habits and relationships), which may not be obtained in any other place and which cannot be easily created or imitated in localities which lack these values. In western countries, local authorities became major participants of urban restructurization, which stimulated transformation from welfare state to economic development state (Piliutytė, 2007). Thus, under the influence of globalization, cities’ governments become stronger and the cities increasingly become attraction centres, which strive to maximize benefit gained from globalization at levels, where expression of globalization processes is the most active.

Impact of globalization on economic development

Economic globalization manifests itself as internationalization of production and expansion of global industries, related to rapid installation of new production and information technologies. Globalization is characterized by continuous growth of international manufacturing, volumes of products and services, and organization of management, which cross borders of countries and join diverse corners of the world into one network. These processes were accelerated by new conditions of global trade, which were strengthened by international agreements, as well as various economic reforms (Vareikis, 2003).  It is noticed that globalization does not conflict with prosperity of cities. Striving to maintain critical strategic advantage in global competition, cities should have their profile, be attractive to citizens, businesses and visitors. For this, an “injection” of creativity is necessary. Glosienė (2007) distinguishes several types of city creativity (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Types of city creativity (according to Glosienė, 2007))

Processes of globalization and European integration, internationalization of private sector and other related phenomena stimulate local government institutions to alter their position, and to implement innovative and unconventional activity methods and strategies (Piliutytė, 2005). Features of transnationality become increasingly evident in activities of cities. Globalization and European integration force cities to observe opportunities and threats of the created common market watchfully. They compete for mobile capital, labour force, institutions and events. Not only business organizations, but also countries, regions and cities must be competitive to survive in modern global market and “modern competition“, which is formed by information and knowledge economy. Nevertheless, competition of cities differs from that of business companies. Cities compete in order to increase their attractiveness to potential target markets (mobiles investments, tourism, large events, and specialized human resources), modern infrastructure, high technologies, innovative activities and systems. Cities also compete in order to improve quality of life and standards of environmental conditions. City’s success in a global competition is a rather relative concept. Territorial systems, which in the context of international competition are capable of benefitting from objective development conditions better than other systems, are considered successful. In other words, successful subjects are the ones, which develop superiorly than their “neighbours“, i.e. contiguous cities, municipalities or farther cities having similar natural or historic resources (Piliutytė, 2007). Today modern technologies give people opportunities to reach the most distant countries quicker, easier and cheaper. Therefore, world’s modern community may be named a “global village”, where all the villagers instantly hear of a new event. This “shortening” of distances makes huge influence on interrelationships of states and development of economy (Vareikis, 2003).
Technological It is evident that in future together with the strengthening globalization, economic competition among European cities will increase; respectively, efficient urban management will become more topical. More and more methods from business sphere will be applied for urban management in order to ensure sustainability of activities of such “urbanistic enterprise“. International competition creates such environment for city’s existence, which cannot manage without implementation of typical actions of marketing concepts (Piliutytė, 2005). Besides, Vareikis (2003) maintains that globalization, just as every other phenomenon has both: positive and negative sides. However, an appropriate use of opportunities provided by technological advance and rising connections between countries may build a firm foundation for countries’ economical development. In any case, it is meaningless to deny the impact of globalization, and economically disadvantageous to try to protect from it.

Effects of globalization that display in socio-cultural spheres of life

Despite the evidently positive results of globalization, one cannot notice rather big problems that came in line with this process. Globalization is a process, which is built on technology, economy and communication; however, it is not related to either higher values or morality. Therefore, it is no wonder that in all countries touched by globalization, actions that are absolutely opposite to the declared ones, take place. These are corruption, frauds, thefts, exploitation and violation of human rights. For maximum objectivity, it should be mentioned that globalization declares high values, such as freedom, tolerance, equality, etc. Problems emerging in the globalized world concern mostly the society and individuals as well as exclusiveness of cultures rather than economic or politic aspects. Ongoing processes affect people’s everyday life more than they notice it. Inhabitants of the globalizing world feel decline of boundaries and national borders. Due to the fact that people are enforced to accept only one (cosmopolitan) identity and no freedom of choice, national conflicts emerge. However, although currently one may notice weakening of nation state, it is not yet completely faded out since its citizens still keep their own historical and cultural identities, and legal state borders protect activities of civic society. Essential feature of identity of each nation and a single city is its culture. If a nation or city dwellers integrate into another culture, they lose their identity and disappear over time. Culture of a modern nation is not a closed system – it is influenced by others; at the same time it in turn influences other cultures as well. This way the nation assimilates new values, which supplement national identity. Nevertheless, the major values are created by the nation itself. The nation constantly struggle for preserving its national heritage, authentic culture, language, customs and traditions (Vareikis, 2003).  Globalization promotes multiculturality, which in turn prompts development of cultural industry, and the latter begin to produce urbanized social and cultural identities and lifestyles. Thus, the engine of globalization is consumption, which evolves in metropolitan environments. In the conditions of globalization, consumption and culture of consuming becomes urbanistic phenomenon. Major “consumption temples“ emerge in urban areas, consumer skills spread from the cities, urban population is provided with the major part of consumary goods. In metropolitan areas, cultural industries produce and provide to the global market new brands of sexualities (“masculinity”, “femininity”, “odd sexualities“), ethnicities, various social groups, fashions and lifestyles on which city-dwellers build their own identities. Movements of globalization prompt persistent growth of variety of urban lifestyles and urban identities as well as binding / unbinding by a particular dwelling-place.  Thus these movements affect identity of the city as well: by producing variety of marketable identities, city reprocesses its urbanistic and social “material” (Rubavičius, 2005). For instant, since the nineteen-sixties Amsterdam feels increasing effects of globalization and adjusting to them, it “rearranged” its identity: its old town became more tourist-oriented district, which provides all kinds of services for sensual pleasures and experiences. Shortly, this city became renown by its tolerance to various expressions of sexuality and soft drugs. Therefore, in the conditions of globalization, tolerance as one of the fundamental features of culture and society was “merchandised”. This influenced urbanistic environment. Formerly, city’s commercial life whirled around the old town, where command posts of European and global economic branches established thus attracting the service businesses; however while city centre increasingly turns into miscellaneous commodity of tourism industry, its “serious” functions moved to the fast-growing suburbs. In the conditions of globalization, “merchandised” cities became localities of tourism industry, where large crowds of consumers. As a result, these localities became their own caricatures. This reasoned assessment of globalization trends should be realized as encouragement to consider support and re-design of urban identity or urban development plans with responsibility (Rubavičius, 2005). Community’s participation in shaping city architecture, especially in the context of globalization processes, remains notably significant. If cooperation between the community and government is inefficient and non-democratic, the government does not receive community’s opinion, which is necessary for proper decision-making. Sometimes community, due to its passivity does not know about the government’s decisions and their possible impact on quality of life of territorial community’s (Jakaitis, 2005). However, increasing global competition and threat of globalization brings new tasks for the cities: it forces them to search for new culture of sustainable development planning by implementing methods of strategic planning and involvement of the society (Bardauskienė, 2007). Since globalization enlarged gap between the rich and poor society members and regions, it is imperative to follow that technologic innovation would not become one more factor for increasing this gap (Bagdzevičienė and Vasiliauskaitė, 2004). Guogis (2004) agrees that globalization frequently has a positive impact on the “winner’s” social status giving to them better opportunities for self-realization, and often brings a negative impact on “loser’s” situation as they become “imprisoned” for longer or shorter time with no clear perspective for rise.  Process of globalization transforms person’s traditional view towards the society and a human’s sex, social status, ethnical background, language and other significant feature, which, as Giddens (2000) indicates, used to be relatively constant. Globalization educates cosmopolitan mentality that is insensitive to historic and ethnic values (Krikštopaitis, 2002). Globalization processes shape a new type of human – immigrant, globalist, who fosters individualism, demonstrates reluctance to tie him/herself to societal norms and values. Individuality destroys national feeling of “us”, which has been built on the background of historically formed common culture, language, territory and economy. In such circumstances modern state loses its foundation, i.e. national identity.  Apart from that, globalization has huge impact on the language, which is one of the central guarantees for preservation of national identity and essential element of national culture. In many countries, national language loses its importance, giving way to English as the single tongue for communication (Grigas, 2001). The same is valid for dialects, which are typical for. Therefore, considering the impact of globalization, care of city’s identity, which manifests itself through language (dialect), architecture, traditions and customs, should be taken.

Conclusions 

Globalization as a phenomenon, which affects all spheres of life, including urban development and expansion, is an important factor that should be considered by city’s strategic planners. Globalization determines political, economical and socio-cultural changes, which in turn influence city development and expansion. Affected by globalization, city governments become stronger and the cities increasingly become attraction centres, which strive to maximize benefit gained from globalization at levels, where expression of globalization processes is the most active.  Just like any other phenomena, globalization has both positive and negative sides. Firstly, it strengthens competition between the cities. However, an appropriate use of opportunities provided by technological advance and rising connections between countries may build a firm foundation for countries’ economical development. Globalization destroys city’s identity of culture and customs. Original cities frequently become “merchandised” and modernised. Cities lose their historical and, often, architectural and cultural peculiarities. Besides, under influence of globalization, disparities between the rich and the poor constantly increase. Despite of these negative features, globalization conditions some possitive results as well: it enables society to participate in the process of urban planning.  Although globalization has positive and negative results, cities’ strategic planners should consider possible effects of globalization. Cities should take advantage of positive impact of globalization, meanwhile striving to avoid the negative influence and to maintain city’s identity and to preserve its culture, customs and architecture to as much extent as possible.

References

1. Bagdzevičienė R., Vasiliauskaitė J. (2004) Valstybės ir regionų vaidmuo inovacijų sklaidos procese. Proceedings of the conference “Regional development – 2002”, Kaunas: Technologija, 15 February, 2004, pp. 36-42.
2. Bardauskienė D. (2007) Ekspertinių vertinimų taikymas rengiant miesto bendrąjį planą. Ūkio technologinis ir ekonominis vystymas, Vol. XIII, No. 3, pp. 223–236. ISSN 1392-8619.
3. Čičinskas  J. (2002) Ekonomikos globalizacija: ką matome horizonte? Euroverslo naujienos, No. 18.
4. Giddens A. (2000) Modernybė ir asmens tapatumas, Vilnius: Pradai, p. 50.
5. Giddens A. (2005) Kintantis pasaulis. Sociologija, pp. 62-85. ISBN 9986-850-54-1.
6. Glosienė A. (2007) Kūrybingumas žinių visuomenėje: idėjų žemėlapis. Informacijos mokslai, No. 41, pp. 9-24. ISSN 1392–0561.
7. Grigas R. (2001) Tautinė savivoka, Vilnius: Rosma, p. 133.
8. Grigas R. (2002) Tautiškumas ir pilietiškumas civilizacijos bei globalizacijos iššūkių akivaizdoje. Filosofija, sociologija, No. 1, pp. 4-9. ISSN 0235-7186.
9. Guogis A. (2004) Globalizacijos poveikis socialinei apsaugai ir socialinei atskirčiai. Politologija, 2004, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 78-109. ISSN 1392–1681.
10. Jakaitis J. (2005) Miesto architektūros savitumas kaip architektūros ir visuomenės sąveikos rezultatas. Urbanistika ir architektūra. Vol. XXIX, No. 4, pp. 191-202. ISSN 1392-1630.
11. Juščius V. (2007) Globalizacijos proceso kiekybiniai matavimai. Proceedings of international scientificpractical conference “Tendencies and Actualities of the Society Development in the Context of Globalization”.
12. Krikštopaitis J. A. (2002) Individualios raiškos problema informacinės globalizacijos tinkle. Filosofija, sociologija, No. 1, pp. 36-39. ISSN 0235-7186.
13. Matakas J., Setkauskis P. (2004) Valstybių transformacija globalizacijos eroje. Viešojo administravimo efektyvumas: monograph, pp. 35-55. ISBN 9955-09-095-2.
14. Piliutytė J. (2005) Rinkodaros metodų taikymo teoriniai aspektai miestų plėtros kontekste. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, No. 11, pp. 95-101. ISSN 1648-2603.
15. Piliutytė J. (2007) Miestų konkurencingumo koncepcija ir analizės lygmenys. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, No. 19, pp. 81-89. ISSN 1648-2603.
16. Rubavičius V. (2005) Miesto tapatumas ir išskirtinumas globalizacijos sąlygomis. Urbanistika ir architektūra, Vol. XXIX, No. 4, pp. 157-163. ISSN 1392-1630.
17. Šaparauskas J. (2004) Darnaus miesto vystymo(-si) daugiatikslė selektonovacija: doctoral dissertation, Vilniaus Gedimino Technikos Universitetas, Vilnius, p. 150.
18. Vareikis E. (2003) Europos identitetas globalizacijos kontekste ir lietuviškos tapatybės raidos problema. Kultūros barai, No. 4, p. 7.