Suchergebnisse

'In diesem Beitrag geht es um das sich wandelnde Verhältnis zwischen transnationalen Unternehmen und internationalen zivilgesellschaftlichen Akteuren. Transnationale Unternehmen sind zur bestimmenden Kraft des Globalisierungsprozesses geworden, Regierungen und Gewerkschaften verlieren in diesem Prozess globaler ökonomischer Integration an Einfluss und können oder wollen ihre Rolle als traditionelle Gegenspielerinnen transnationaler Unternehmen nicht mehr in ausreichendem Maße wahrnehmen. In dieses Machtvakuum sind seit den 90er Jahren vermehrt zivilgesellschaftliche Akteure getreten, die versuchen, direkt das Verhalten von Unternehmen zu beeinflussen, wobei hier Prozesse internationaler zivilgesellschaftlicher Selbstorganisation von besonderer Bedeutung sind. Der Beitrag arbeitet heraus, dass sich die Beziehungen zwischen transnationalen Unternehmen und zivilgesellschaftlichen Akteuren aufgrund von Veränderungen im Weltwirtschaftssystem notwendigerweise intensivieren werden. Diese Transformationsprozesse führen zu neuen Organisationsformen, Strategien und Gegenstrategien der Akteure, aber auch zu neuartigen Kooperationsmustern. Im Schlusskapitel skizziert der Autor mögliche Entwicklungsszenarien der Beziehung zwischen transnationalen Unternehmen und Zivilgesellschaft sowie deren Bedeutung für die gesellschaftliche Entwicklung.' (Autorenreferat)

"09 April 2002"--P. iii. ; Includes bibliographical references (p. 23-27) ; Mode of access: Internet.

The involvement of non-state actors in world politics can hardly be characterised as novel, but intensifying economic and social exchange and the emergence of new modes of international governance have given them much greater visibility and, many would argue, a more central role. Non-state Actors in World Politics offers analyses of a diverse range of economic, social, legal (and illegal), old and new actors, such as the Catholic Church, trade unions, diasporas, religious movements, transnational corporations and organised crime.

Recent scholars have broadened the study of transnational relations, once limited to political economy, to include contentious international politics. This is a refreshing trend, but most of them leap directly from globalization or some other such process to transnational social movements and thence to a global civil society. In addition, they have so far failed to distinguish among movements, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and transnational networks and do not adequately specify their relations with states and international institutions. In particular, few mechanisms are proposed to link domestic actors to transnational ones and to states and international institutions. This paper argues that mass-based transnational social movements are hard to construct, are difficult to maintain, and have very different relations to states and international institutions than more routinized international NGOs or activist networks. These latter forms may be encouraged both by states and international institutions and by the growth of a cosmopolitan class of transnational activists. Rather than being the antipodes of transnational contention, international institutions offer resources, opportunities, and incentives for the formation of actors in transnational politics. If transnational social movements form, it will be through a second-stage process of domestication of international conflict.

While globalization means many different things to many different people, there is growing consensus that capitalist globalization is its most powerful contemporary form. This article argues that capitalist globalization, & thus effective power in the global system, is increasingly in the hands of a transnational capitalist class (TCC) comprising four fractions: those who own & control the major corporations & their local affiliates, globalizing bureaucrats & politicians, globalizing professionals, & consumerist elites. The TCC engages in a variety of activities that take place at all levels, including community, urban, national, & global politics, & involve many different groups of actors. Two sets of questions are addressed: (1) What forms do these activities take? & (2) Do they enhance or undermine democracy? The role of the TCC is analyzed through brief case studies on Codex Alimentarius & the global tobacco industry. 16 References. [Copyright 2002 Sage Publications, Inc.]

Increasing numbers of sending states are systematically offering social and political membership to migrants residing outside their territories. The proliferation of these dual memberships contradicts conventional notions about immigrant incorporation, their impact on sending countries, and the relationship between migration and development in both contexts. But how do ordinary individuals actually live their lives across borders? Is assimilation incompatible with transnational membership? How does economic and social development change when it takes place across borders? This article takes stock of what is known about everyday transnational practices and the institutional actors that facilitate or impede them and outlines questions for future research. In it, I define what I mean by transnational practices and describe the institutions that create and are created by these activities. I discuss the ways in which they distribute migrants' resources and energies across borders, based primarily on studies of migration to the United States.

Uluslararası ekonominin gelişim süreci 1840'lı yıllarda buhar makinesinin bulunması ile yeni bir aşamaya girmiştir. Bu yeni aşamada kapitalizmin gelişimi daha da hızlanmıştır. Diğer yandan ekonomik birikim de büyük bir hızla artmaya başlamıştır. Özellikle kolonileşme, ve deniz aşırı sömürgelerde ortaya çıkan yeni imkanlar ve pazarlar dolayısıyla uluslararası ticaret önemli bir ivme kazanmış, ve dünya ticaret hacminde bugün küreselleşme adı altında yaşanılan hareketlenmenin bir benzerine on dokuzuncu yüzyıl sonlarında ulaşılmıştır.On dokuzuncu yüzyılda ortaya çıkan bu ticari hareketlenme, önce Birinci sonra da daha büyük bir etkiyle İkinci Dünya Savaşı'ndan sonra duraklama dönemine girmiştir. Uzun süre boyunca Amerika Birleşik Devletleri ve onun destekleri altında kurulan IMF ve Dünya Bankası aracılığıyla bir yeniden imar süreci yaşanmıştır. 1960'lı yıllara kadar süren bu yeniden imar sürecinden sonra, dünyada yeni bir ekonomik serbestleşme ve dışa açılma süreci yaşanmaya başlanmıştır. Küreselleşme de bu noktada, yani finansal ve ticari dışa açılma sürecinde içinde etkin bir kavram olarak ortaya çıkmıştır. 1970li yıllarda hız kazanan küreselleşme özellikle teknolojik gelişmeler ve bunun sağladığı imkanlarla, finansal sermayenin uluslar arası boyutta büyük bir hızla akabildiği yeni bir iktisadi ortam yaratmıştır. Bu yeni ortamda ortaya çıkan kimi olgular önemli tartışmalara yol açmış, küreselleşmenin olumlu ve olumsuz etkileri üzerinde ağırlıklı olarak durulmaya başlanmıştır. Küreselleşmenin bir unsuru olarak Çok Uluslu Şirketler de kendilerine yaşam alanı bulmuş ve uluslararası ekonominin temel taşıyıcılarından olmakla kalmamış, aynı zamanda siyasi olarak da uluslararası bir aktör konumuna ilerlemişlerdir. Bu çalışmada temel olarak, son elli yılda hızla değişen ve sürekli olarak değişmekte olan dünya iktisadi ve siyasi profili, küreselleşme boyutunda incelenmiş ve bu değişim sürecinde Türkiye'nin içinde bulunduğu konum ve yapması gerekenler üzerinde durulmuştur.Since the 1800s, the world has been witnessing dramatic changes in almost all dimensions of relationships. Every technological advancement, new innovations, use of new techniques bring along with them a new social and economic form of life. The world is constantly in process of changes and every unit try to adopt these changes and try to take its place in the new orders. History has shown that the ones who adopt to these changes first gain an advantageous place while the others face serious difficulties. In contemporary world, no issue can be dealed alone with itself, every issue has close ties with many other issues. Today, there remained few issues which is solely related with economics or politics.Also some new concepts were brought by the structural transformation process like; the high degree of globalisation including; the rise of multinational companies, the high levels of international trade, great rise of foreign direct investments, close political, social and cultural relations among states and non-state actors. This period also represents the time when the non-state actors gained significant importance. The main non-state actors include the territorial nonstate actors, such as national liberation movements; nonterritorial transnational organizations, such as transnational corporations; and intergovernmental organizations, such as NATO or the OECD.Within this new environment, one of these non-state actors; Transnational Corporations had the chance to gain new missions besides their purely economic ones. Today, Transnational Corporations appear as an international policy actor which came to affect the national decisons of states.Contemporary world shows signs of significant differantiating charactersitics than the past. Every international actor, every entity work to find their own places in this transformation process. In the light of these changes, this study will mainly focus on the globalisation of world politics and explore the transnational companies as their being the most interesting feature of globalisation. Also, a brief look on Turkey will be made in order to explore Turkey's position in this transformation process.

The paper argues that both the deepening of the EU, and the concrete form of its eastward expansion is motivated by an overarching project of neoliberal restructuring at the EU level, initiated by the forces of an emerging transnational capitalist class. Whereas the deepening project could be developed into a precarious hegemonic constellation, and resulted in an "embedded" neoliberalism, the EU has exported a much more market- radical variant of neoliberalism to the applicant states. This serves best the interest of those actors who seek to capitalize on differences in social and wage standards, and moreover helps to prevent distributional conflicts within the EU. East European reform elites are not prone to resist the unequal terms of Europeanization: They seek to secure extemal rationales for economic restructuring and to solidify transnational economic ties and political influence.