Monday, July 04, 2005

Change the Plot

Marx said that philosophers should not only interpret the world, but change it. His mother though was said to lament, “If only Karl made Capital instead of just writing about it…” We Filipinos need to carefully think our state of affairs through. As one economist wrote, the crux of the matter is not only in changing the world but in first interpreting it CORRECTLY.

The past few weeks have been politically and economically brutal for the nation. After a good economic first quarter, dirty politics, graft and corruption, and roadblocks to economic reform are threatening the modest economic gains of the economy. Indeed, in the Philippines, the economy is intertwined with politics. Or is it?

Everyone in the country loves discussing politics. A look at the newspapers, writings of columnists, TV talk shows, and even discussions at family gatherings ultimately focus on politics. The alleged shenanigans of the Macapagal administration and the Arroyo men make for good fodder. Why so? In discussing what ails the country and the search for solutions, do the people agree on the root causes and the course of action needed?

From listening to these discussions and reading what columnists and “experts” write, the problems identified are generally; a corrupt government and legislature, peace and order issues, poor infrastructure, rampant poverty, and overpopulation, among others. Recommended solutions range from a hardline, authoritarian leader, to a parliamentary form of government, to a communist revolution. We ask, why is it that the identified problems are mainly economic in nature, but the solutions prescribed political? One could easily answer that this is the reality of political economy; but what if we try something else, something based on reality? Why should the national savior be a politician?

Two EDSA People Power, numerous coup de’tats, national worker strikes, a communist insurgency, Muslim secessionist movement, church activism, etc. have not done much to improve governance by our politicians and bureaucrats. Politicians and bureaucrats are clearly a problem and a significant part of the solution, but reforming them is not the only solution unless we are willing to literally KILL them all off.

Many of our countrymen have done the next best thing. They have voted with their feet. They have not given up on their country, only their politicians and bureaucrats. The Leftists’ calls for various boycotts have been taken up by our overseas foreign workers (OFWs), who want nothing to do with government. They have gone abroad to become the best that they could be in their fields, specialization, and careers. For many the costs are high, but their individual actions collectively state their priorities. These seven million plus OFWs prioritize personal and professional achievement, family economic security, and a better future for them and their families. For the country, the OFWs have been an economic lifesaver. They deserve more than just as a new national commodity.

For those who have remained behind, the successful are those who have done it through legal and honorable means or through criminal and rent-seeking activities. Looking only at the former, these small and medium-sized entrepreneurs, big businessmen, and professionals diligently conduct their affairs and seek to minimize their interaction with government. I know of successful businessmen who refuse to bid on government contracts and avoid contact with government. The successful Chinoy business community deals with government on an arms-length basis and through third party mediators. Their focus is on growing their businesses, not socializing with the political powers. The Ayala family, who have adopted the motto “Profit with Honor” have tapped the best and brightest their money can hire to help them professionalize and expand their businesses.

Business leaders like PLDT’s Manny Pangilinan, the Aboitizes, Lorenzos, and so on, have not only studied the Philippine business cycle well, but have developed a deep understanding of what products and services the country needs. These they provide to the immense profit of their respective companies.

What do these individuals and organizations have in common? The focus is excellence, be it personal or business. Diligence. Skill. Individual and corporate achievement. Providing for the family and the future. Personal integrity and responsibility. Continuing education. Highly competitive spirit. Work ethic. Team effort. Profit with honor. Corporate responsibility. Innovation. Studied risk taking. Growth and diversification.

What about government? Government is seen by them as a hindrance, a burden, something to be overcome. For the OFWs, government is irrelevant. For the companies, they must ensure that they comply with all laws and regulations. Do they seek to influence government or resist some corrupt politician or bureaucrats’ attempts to extract money from them? Sure they do, but they do it at arms length. No way will they invite these corrupt politicians and bureaucrats to dinner in their homes. Have you noticed how geographically far away our resilient farmers and fishermen are from bureaucrats?

Democracy is not only exercised at the polling booth. Politicians, their lackeys, arm-chair intellectuals, and the media have drummed it into us that votes, which are easily bought, are the best and only manifestation of a vibrant democracy. Another way though of exercising democracy and good governance is through each individual’s wallet.

We each need to take back control of our individual destinies. Do not wait for the government to reform itself and get the economy to grow. Politicians and bureaucrats are enriching themselves through rent-seeking activities because we allow them to. Where do we start in preventing this?

To the youth, do not abandon your education. Make sure you get a degree regardless if you are a Leftist or party animal. Sooner or later you will need that degree for credibility when you are in power or applying for work. Unless you want to be an inept individual and a liability to the organization you will join, you will need basic skills of reading comprehension, writing, public speaking, math, abstract thinking, and adaptability, among others. Get these skills in school asap. Plus, it will be harder for the politician/bureaucrat to fool or intimidate you.

To the entrepreneur, seek business opportunities that minimize interaction with government officials at all levels. Seek a low profile so you are not targeted by them. Study the lifestyle of the Chinoy entrepreneur, who saves and re-invests profits, diversifies both in business and geographical terms, and seeks to constantly improve his/her situation. If you do have to interact with a government official, do so professionally and do not seek to befriend them. It will be cheaper for you and less stressful in the long run.

To the professional, it is okay to seek employment abroad if that will ensure the economic future of your family. Take your expertise to the one who will either pay you or who appreciates your skill and professionalism the most. You deserve it. Love of country is not based on where you live, but what is in your heart and the help you will eventually extend to your friends, relatives, and community. When abroad, insist that OFW associations do not host or invite politicians who visit to speak or seek financial support. The point is to ignore the corrupt officials.

To civil society, focus your energies on specific, attainable goals. Do prioritize local sites and situations. In fighting for good governance, focus on the erring official and his/her family, while demanding command responsibility. Corruption is personally enriching, hence the consequence must be intimately personal. Information is a powerful tool. Get and clearly document instances of graft and corruption and immediately share it with the public through the internet, text, TV, radio, etc. Set up blogsites/websites that accept tips on graft, corruption, and criminal activities of government officials. The corrupt must be publicly ostracized. Let the management of these sites be flat and free-wheeling so that it will be hard to shut down. Increase the penetration of the Internet and other mass information technology to the countryside and to poorer communities, so that they can participate in a grassroots movement of governance. Your success will inspire compassionate individuals, and there are many, to support your cause.

Politics has been used to corner scarce resources for interest groups. Individual wealth and community self-help can insulate us from the pervasive influence of corrupt officials. Focus on generating your own wealth, while at the same time insisting on good governance. With a bigger middle class, more pressure can be laid to bear on government officials to do what is right.

Approximately 7.5 million Americans and 67,000 Hong Kong residents have assets of at least $1 million exclusive of primary residence. The Asia-Pacific region has at least 2.3 million millionaires mainly concentrated in India, Hong Kong, Australia, and Singapore. Economic growth and market capitalization are the main drivers. In these countries, even with a monkey as the leader, the economy and market continue to operate.

The bottom line is it will be wealth, individual wealth in many hands that will determine whether our country will grow or become a failed state. It is individual wealth that will enable us to demand good governance, hale the corrupt to court, sue the incompetent government official, jail the criminal, pay for better infrastructure and social services, and financially support civil society. It is not government who will do it but ultimately each one of us.

Do not believe what is being written that we need a political savior, a benevolent hardliner, or a communist takeover for the economy to grow. The first two are contradictions in terms, while the communists, though idealists, are inept in management and governance. Further, as seen in the Erap leftist officials, they are easily co-opted by sudden riches.

The most sustainable reform movements are those that are broad based, cognizant of merit, wealth-generating, focused on self-help and enlightened self-interest but with a sense of community, compassionate, and integrity-driven. These movements try their best NOT to depend on politicians. Once successful they leverage this success to help others and seek reforms. That is why projects such as Gawad Kalinga, the OFW initiatives, the community-based environmental programs, voluntary professional associations like Rotary, European Chamber of Commerce in the Philippines, MABINI, etc.; organizations such as the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Businessworld, WWF, etc.; businesses like Jollibee, Globe, San Miguel, PLDT, Ayala, Red Ribbon, and the Chinoy business community are so efficient, effective, and successful. These are real people doing real things.

Political reform to effect economic growth is only one way. Political reform can be done either violently or with fundamental societal change that may have either positive or unintended consequences. Another way is through individual wealth generation that enables citizens and civil society to pressure government officials to do what is right.

How do we go about generating wealth? That is your task. Read the StreetStrategist's Hyperwage Theory at the Businessworld.

Saturday, May 28, 2005

Comments on Prof. Ylagan's Hocking the Future

Comments on Hocking the Future By Amelia H.C. Ylagan (week of May 9-13, 2005, www.bworldonline.com)
Hola Nilo, as always, your comments are insightful. I totally agree with you, especially if I was in government or business. With a huge foreign/domestic debt and a bloated bureaucracy, government has no funds for anything else, particularly infrastructure development, education, social services, and defense. Indeed, raising capital is expensive whether for government or business activities (how the heck will we be able to buy a house without help from our families/relatives?).

My comments though were geared more to a strategic framework of governance. Correct me if I am wrong, but your starting point is that you are wearing the shoes of a government official. If so, then the starting point is: Government has no money, so it needs to raise funds creatively.

But what if you were wearing the shoes of business or civil society? Then the framework of analysis be: Should we prioritize solving the process inefficiencies of graft and corruption in society and hopefully benefit by: a) generating savings/ revenues from better tax and fees collections; b) renewed confidence in government leading to investments, grants, loans, etc.?

I have no answers to these chicken or egg questions (especially since I don’t want to be in government’s shoes at present--but that is escaping the problem). Also, are we discussing from different perspectives, me from a social science perspective and you from a financial and operational point of view? How do we combine both or other perspectives?

Is the ability of businessmen to discount market difficulties and distortions in their operations different when it comes to (political) governance? It is just that government has no credibility in asking everyone to pitch in under their direction despite graft and corruption at all levels of government. It might be too much to ask without meaningful reform (what with good people consecutively resigning from government).

In a way, I was asking Prof. Ylagan, what happens if the citizenry starts to discount the pervasiveness of government in our lives? Our parents sort of did that during Marcos’ time. But what if it is done on an even wider scale that parallels what Gen. Almonte wrote earlier this year (on using the market)? The presence of a large number of NGOs and the size of the underground economy doing what government should be doing, I think, are indicators of this. Social (or environmental) movements grow in proportion to the negative effects of globalization, poverty, bad governance, environmental impacts, etc.

On the part of the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs-take note Ed…), I wrote earlier that they are organizing on their own and trying to be self-sufficient in all possible areas. What does this mean? Are their earnings better utilized this way rather than going to government during the present time? What kind of social movement is it shaping up to be? I’ve attached below, from just one OFW e-group, the number of their related e-groups. Are the number and diversity signs of strength or weakness? Anyone into organizational network analysis will find this veeeeery intriguing (baka Frieda can do her dissertation on this). Even for entrepreneurs out there, this phenomenon raises intriguing possibilities.

FOR ONLINE BAYANIHAN and DAMAYAN at Global Filipinos in Information Technology (Fil-IT):

1. RuralComp - a mass computer literacy - www.ruralcomp.net
2. Database of the Future -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it/database
3. Tulong Pinoy Movement - the cyber NGO - www.tpmovers.org
4. Bridging OFWs worldwide -
http://www.ofw-tv.com
5. Vote for OFW Airlines - http://ofwairlines.tk
6. Help my Hometown - http://www.tpmovers.org/HelpMyHometown.pdf
7. Lazaga Elem School - Pangasinan - http://www.tpmovers.org/lazaga_elem_school.htm
8. San Isidro Parish - Lipa-Batangas -http://www.tpmovers.org/pianoorgan_donation.htm
9. OFW Business / Investment Groups
10. OFW Monorail -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ofw-monorail/join
11. OFW Airlines - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ofw-airlines/join
12. OFW Transport Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ofw-transport/join
13. OFW Business Center Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-businesscenter/join
14. OFW Credit Card Company - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-creditcard/join
15. OFW Public Utilities - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-PublicUtilities/join
16. OFW Marine Investments / Microfinancing -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ofw-imc-forum/join
17. OFW Telecom - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-telecom/join
18. OFW Wellness Center - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-wellnesscenter/join
19. OFW Subway / Railway - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fil-it-OFW-subwayrail/join
20. OFW-AFRRIE - Agricultural-Forest-Residential-Resort-Industrial Estate Model – http://www.ofw-afrrie.com
What models are being formed here? How is the Filipino diaspora different from the Jewish, Irish, Gypsie, Chinese, Asian, etc. diasporas of different historial eras (an article by Perry Diaz partly answers this)? I tell you, when it comes to civil society innovations, the Philippines is a global leader.
__________

FROM A COLLEAGUE:

Hecks,One big problem for any start-up company or an emerging market like the Philippines, is the availability of cheap funds. We don't have that luxury due to our very leveraged situation and very low revenue base. This holds true for the thousands of SMEs in the country that provides a major source of employment for our country. Without funds to invest whether you are government or an SME, one's potential growth is limited.In that sense, we don't have a choice but to widen our ability to generate more revenues. One could label "graft and corruption" as a process inefficiency if government were a private undertaking. Some process improvements take time and any improvement on corruption will take some time.What the government has in the short term is the ability to create immediate impact on the revenue side. The tax base is just too narrow to support the needs of a growing population. A tax effort of 12.5% of GDP won't cut it.There remains many avenues albeit unpopular ones:1) Tax on text- not inflationary at all- original estimates were at Php5-6B. Anti-poor- not at all. Text used to be free but telcos started charging and yet they've seen a exponential rise in usage.2) Income tax on OFW's. Previously, Filipinos working abroad, paid between 1-6% income taxes until someone changed it. Some symbolic income tax will go a long way in increasing the tax base. Woe to the Philippine based employees who pay between 6-32% of their very depreciated peso earnings.Nation-building calls for everyone to pitch in.Hope things are going well for you and Tammy.Best regards.
Nilo
_______________________________________________

May 23, 2005


Thanks for the article Hocking the Future. Sorry I couldn’t reply right away. I was away last week for a U.S.-Mexico border environment conference in Baja California, Mexico, which was very interesting. my comments on your article are the following:

I agree mostly with you comments. The government’s trial balloon announcement smacks though of desperation. It seems like they are now willing to go after the family’s jewels or the children’s trust fund, so to speak. After allowing our U.S and Ivy League-trained technocrats to borrow like there was no tomorrow, they are scraping the bottom for novel ideas.

Novel ideas though should be equated with the need to address issues of graft and corruption in the BIR, BOC, DPWH, etc. Tax evasion/leakage/ exemption and the theft of government funds need to be addressed by government. Until bold reforms are initiated, our fiscal problems will linger.

With bold reforms in this sector, will come the energy, courage, and determination to address the issue of selective debt repudiation of Marcos-era debts and the aggressive renegotiation of the lopsided IPP contracts. Justice Puno has laid the legal conceptual framework for debt cancellation, especially for the BNPP.

But you know all of this already. What I want to stress though or ask is whether you sense a widening disconnect between the government/politicians on one side and the populace/civil society on the other side?

I am part of a handful of expatriate e-groups and the discussions increasingly speak of initiatives that discount the participation of government. There are initiatives and online discussions on OFW banking facilities, airlines (yes, they want to put up their own airline), countryside development projects, TV (pilot projects in existence), IT projects, job placements, health, education, etc. OFWs are organizing. They have the training, experience, and they are networking on a global scale.

OFWs as a social movement, I think, is occurring. Government and the Manila elite look at OFWs as naïve and immature people that can be manipulated and exploited. While there are many cases of exploitation, I am willing to bet that the best and brightest from the OFW world will get together and will organize to defend and promote their interests, even if this is against the government’s priorities.

When Jaime Zobel de Ayala gave that speech on the need to look at OFWs as a resource of the country, the government should not take it to mean that they can use OFW remittances to fund their corrupt and incompetent management of national affairs. OFWs have a sense of what they want to do with their earnings and letting the government use it is not one of them. They went abroad precisely to avoid interacting with government (they voted with their feet). To exploit their remittances is not only unjust, it is an insult to the sacrifices of OFWs.

This is not the way for government to be innovative. Rather it should be innovative in instituting bold reforms and limiting the pervasive influence of vested interests without leading to instability and violent class conflict. A third way of political economy is what is in order for the Philippines.

It is the task of Philippine intelligentsia, civil society, people’s organizations, citizens, government, politicians, and all concerned to develop this third way.
All the best.

Comments on the proposed medical malpractice criminalization bill

Just a few additional thoughts on the proposed medical malpractice bill filed by Philippine Senators.

1. This discussion has been ongoing for a few years now. While on principle I am against it, the continuing discussion and pressure to enact such a law may be reflective of the frustration and lack of action against erring doctors.

2. This situation then is also reflective of the impotence and neglect of the Philippine Medical Association (PMA) and other oversight or regulatory bodies on ensuring quality medical service from its members as well as resolution of malpractice complaints from the public.

3. Thus, the problem of medical practice can be seen at multiple levels both structural and professional. At the structural level, the medical profession is overworked, understaffed, poorly compensated, lacks equipment, unevenly geographically distributed, perhaps under-trained, frustrated, and discouraged, among others. Many have set their eyes on working abroad.

4. The national economy is not robust enough for prioritizing nutrition, health, and preventive medicine. Environmental degradation threatens national health, hence making heavier the workload of medical practitioners.

5. Note however, that it is the task of the national government to be more proactive rather than reactive. The root causes of medical malpractice should be determined. Are we training cohorts of incompetent doctors or is the system turning aspiring, dedicated doctors into frustrated, unhappy, and disillusioned doctors?

6. It is government’s task to create a positive, encouraging, and LEVEL, playing field for medical practitioners. I don’t have the answers to these deep structured problems, but a few initiatives may help.

7. The first of course is to stem the hemorrhaging of our doctors/nurses leaving for abroad. While we should encourage them to seek the best training wherever, they must return to ensure the health of the nation is not compromised.

8. This means a creative set of initiatives both financial and non-financial to retain our doctors and nurses, as well as to encourage those abroad to set aside some time during the year to practice in their home country and perhaps retire here to do consulting.

9. Because of its strategic location in the Asia-Pacific region and its deep talent, the Philippines should naturally be the regional health center of the region. Medical costs are rising in the Western world and the baby boomer generation will be retiring soon. Coupled with a deteriorating environment, health issues are on the rise. The Philippines should prepare to capture a slice of the growing health and medical services sector nationally, regionally, and globally.

10. Medical practitioners still need to be held accountable for their actions. Anecdotal evidence abounds on erring doctors, corruption, the negative side of the seniority and medical fraternity old boy/girl network, the pervasive influence of the pharmaceutical firms, etc. Short of legislating morality and competence, what else can be done to ensure accountability?

11. If one were an economist, one would use the market to ensure that competition brings out the best in everyone. The market works when the rules are enforced and there is perfect information. On the first, I think we have enough laws to address professional neglect/incompetence. On the second issue, perfect information, instead of laws we should develop a way where we can monitor the effectiveness of the medical practitioner, keep track of their professional progress (or errors), and relay this information to those who need it.

12. When we were a young nation and our communities more cohesive, the community doctor had personal and long-term relationships with one’s patients. I myself only visit doctors/dentists recommended by friends or family. The few cold calls I made resulted in less than satisfactory treatment. Community relations ensured that the doctor did his/her best. Communication, an essential component of medical service, was intense and of good quality. Rumors of negligence or incompetence were enough to kill a doctor’s business in a locality.

13. Monitoring, evaluation, and feedback work in business and industry. If it is transparent, participatory, and easily accessible this may be a better alternative to new laws that may further drive doctors/nurses abroad or raise the cost of medical services across board.

We need to think our problems through. The problems of the medical sector are deep seated and medical malpractice is only a symptom and not the underlying cause. It involves structural issues and not just the personal capabilities of the medical practitioner. Philippine society is different from the litigious American society. Maybe there is another way of ensuring both professional accountability and the strengthening of the medical services sector. Let us discuss this in a more holistic manner that encourages the various professions/disciplines in the country to develop in a competent and HUMANIST manner.

The country's loss: Dr. Raymundo S. Punongbayan

I was connected with an environmental consulting firm until 2003, when I left to do my PhD in anthropology in the U.S. Dr. Punongbayan was one of our top, occasional consultants (geology and seismology). In the mid-90s, in a public hearing, he received a thunderous applause when introduced to the participants. I'll never forget how he didn't have any transparencies and notes and made his presentation by drawing his points directly on the projector itself. As part of the team, I knew what he was going to say, but his lecture was still one of the best I've heard. Like many of you who have known him, being with and listening to the best, wisest, helpful, and most sincere people is one of life's greatest pleasures. He and his colleagues (who were with him when their helicopter crashed) will be missed.

Friday, April 22, 2005

Is there such a thing as Sustainable Growth?

Last March 30, 2005, a week after the prepublication draft was approved by the study’s governing board; the tongue-twisting Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) Synthesis Report (http://www.millenniumassessment.org) was presented to the public. More than 2,000 scientists, researchers, policy specialists, and reviewers (including several from the Philippines) from 95 countries cooperated in preparing the MA Report. The assessment was prepared in response to the 2000 report of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan (We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century), which cited the need to document the consequences of global human activities on the environment and to establish the scientific basis for the recommendations drafted.

The findings come as no surprise to those who have worked in the sustainable development sector. It also, once and for all, comprehensively refutes assertions of disingenuous scientists like Bjorn Lomborg (The Skeptical Environmentalist, Cambridge University Press 2001) who insist that the earth is still resilient enough, and with technological innovations, will continue to allow for more breakneck growth. The report in itself can and should be used as a resource material; not only for schoolchildren, but also to everyone especially power holders and capital-wielders to reflect on how human actions may be compromising our society’s survival and sustainability.

The main findings are sobering. Ecosystems provide the basis and linkages for man to meet the constituents of well-being, namely; (a) personal, resource, and (from) disaster security, (b) access to adequate livelihood, nutritious food, shelter, and needed goods, (c) health, well-being, access to clean air and water, (d) good social relations (mutual respect, social cohesion, ability to help others), and ultimately, (d) the freedom of responsible choice and action. Yet, humans have made unprecedented and profound changes to these ecosystems to meet the growing needs of food, potable water, timber, fiber, and fuel.

The rate of change in the last 50 years has been no like other in the past two centuries and is having non-linear (abrupt, accelerating, potentially irreversible, highly complex and interactive) effects. Conversion of land to agriculture has increased the supply of food but has led to the extinction of species (more than 1,000x background rates) and a decline in genetic diversity both of which play important roles in maintaining ecological stability. Around 2 billion people are vulnerable because of the dwindling supplies and limited access to freshwater, while more and new diseases are expected to become more prevalent because of continuing ecosystem degradation. Climate change, mainly due to emissions from fossil fuels, is exacerbating the problems. Fish stocks and the global marine ecosystem are in a dire and crisis state such that the food security of millions of mostly poor communities is in peril. Without a fundamental change in how humans look at, utilize, and care for nature and one another, the next 50 years will lead to horrendous difficulties for humanity.

The MA Report’s recommendations are not new. Philosophers, scientists, religious persons, activists, enlightened businessmen and politicians have written and spoken about what should be done to address ecosystem degradation. What the MA Report does is put into the forefront the truism that ecosystem degradation is in fact a loss of capital assets. It also highlights the growing inequities between the rich and poor and the need to address poverty on a global scale. Sooner or later, even the rich will join the poor in being seriously impacted. The report went to the extent of mentioning that forms of social, behavioral, cognitive, and knowledge responses are needed. It stops short, though, on commenting on whether economic growth and the high-energy lifestyle in industrialized countries should be curtailed.

This, however, is the crux of the matter. Although many subscribe to the tenets of sustainable development, this should not be equated with the term sustainable growth as former World Bank economist Herman Daly writes in Beyond Growth (1996). Sustainable growth is a contradiction in terms. As a species, we need to ask ourselves and more specifically those in the industrialized countries, whether economic growth in their part of the world should continue forever. To Daly, if economic growth of the rate experienced in the G7 countries were to occur in industrializing and poor countries, the global environment’s carrying capacity will collapse immediately. Daly estimated that it “requires about one third of the current annual world extraction of nonrenewable resources to support that 6% (or less) of the world’s population in the United States at a per capita level to which it is thought that the rest of the world should aspire” (p.105). A lot of people think that we can grow ourselves out of our problems be it economic or environmental, but the empirical findings do not support this thesis.

Neoclassical economists have always looked at economic activities as existing in an isolated circular system with firms producing goods and services for households who provide the means for further reproduction of these goods/ services. Further, they note that mitigation of environmental impacts is included in the price of the product (“externalized costs”). Daly says this is a faulty preanalytic vision of how the economy operates. In reality, the economy is an open subsystem of the environment and that many factors of production come from the environment and are finite. Daly called for a new vision, basically asking, “what is the proper scale of the macroeconomy relative to the ecosystem” (p.48)?

Daly recommended that economists read Frederick Soddy and Nicolas Georgescu-Roegen, rather than people like Lawrence Summers, formerly of the World Bank, Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, and now President of Harvard, who once proposed dumping pollution from industrialized nations into the “underutilized” developing countries. Recently, Summers rhetorically asked whether women academicians were up to the rigors of high-level research/teaching. Soddy (1922, 1926, 1933, and 1934) was a Nobel awardee and chemist who insisted that the starting point of economics must be the first and second law of thermodynamics. The first law of thermodynamics states that energy cannot be created/destroyed but transformed, while the second law states that natural processes are directional and irreversible, leading to entropy in the system.

Georgescu-Roegen, a Romanian émigré, was Daly’s professor at Vanderbilt U., who without reading Soddy, wrote The Entropy Law and the Economic Process (1971 Cambridge University Press). Using an hour- glass metaphor, he noted that there are two resource stocks which man uses, the solar stock and the terrestrial stock. The former may seem infinite, but it actually isn’t, while the latter is definitely finite. The flow of this resource stock is only downward and irreversible (the hour-glass cannot be inverted). Unfortunately, man is currently using up the terrestrial stock, degrading ecosystems, and generating high entropy material such as wastes.

In essence, both Soddy and Georgescu-Roegen state that the economy cannot continue to expand at rates that the industrialized world has grown accustomed to. The economy is dependent upon the ecosystem for its inputs. Ultimately, the total scale of key resource throughput has to be limited. Afterall, as Daly wryly asks, of what use are better or more chainsaws when there are fewer trees to cut or better or more fishing boats when there are less fish to catch? Hence, global society should work at sustainable development, which is the qualitative improvement of life indicators without growth beyond environmental carrying capacity (Daly 1996:9). This has serious implications on up to how many mouths we can feed (population) and who gets to own what and use what (resource ownership and utilization). Free trade, for example, has to transform itself into fair trade with the industrialized world having to settle with less.

For the Philippines, we (especially power and capital holders) need to rethink how we look at fair trade, income distribution, natural resource utilization, infrastructure development, education and knowledge management, social justice, even our religious beliefs, morals, ethics and so on. Once we’ve internalized that the economy is an open subsystem of the environment, we can then value our resources and ensure that they benefit the Filipino first and foremost. Free trade should not lead to a country dependent on imports, a culture of consumerism, and without domestic food security. The latest Supreme Court ruling on foreign investment in mining, for example, should generate downstream processing industries and fund: (a) the rehabilitation of degraded areas, (b) economic diversification of mining areas, and, (c) training and education of local/ native environmental scientists, geologists, mining engineers, etc.

Income inequality may be a result of historical and social factors, but the gap needs to close to a level that reflects merit and industriousness, not birthright. The country needs to invest in the education of its youth and ensure its capacity to feed its populace, protect and conserve its natural resources, and integrate the nation through infrastructure, communication and information technologies, as well as promote cultural and social solidarity.

Is growth then sustainable? In the Philippines, there is still room for growth, but we should keep in mind that economic growth should be justly distributive and the focus eventually should be on sustainable development in a steady-state economy. Our natural resource stock should be strategically utilized, meaning, it should lead to clean and green industrialization of the country and not solely as a supplier of raw materials to the richer nations. Daly concludes that “We are creatures endowed with creativity but also subject to limits, and we have obligations to our Creator to care for Creation, to maintain intact its capacity to support life and wealth” (p.224).

Happy Earth Day!

Monday, April 11, 2005

Economic Revolution- on Almonte's market strategy

Economic revolution

Philstar’s Alex Magno recently quoted a think piece by former President Ramos’ former National Security Adviser, (Ret.) General Jose Almonte, on how the country is faring and what it needs to do. Almonte, among many stories of brilliant strategizing, is also known for preparing a few months before the 1998 presidential elections a think piece predicting a revolution of sorts within two years of an Erap presidency. Edsa Dos occurred in early 2001.

We all have our ideas on how to solve the national problems. It’s just that everyone seems frustrated at how our politicians are clowning around, how the peace and order situation is deteriorating, and how the economy is underperforming. What is intriguing about Almonte’s thesis is that instead of addressing the soft state (can not enforce its laws) of the country politically, he proposes that Filipinos must vastly improve the economic to spur political reform, i.e. law and order, management of grant and corruption, etc. This is the path being taken by China. As the Chinese economy expands, democratic stirrings are beginning.
I will suspend my misgivings on how the absence of distributional (power and resources) justice can be neglected in favor of economic growth and development and thereby lead to social justice and equity. Let us explore how Almonte's thesis can proceed. How do Pinoy expatriates, and we citizens who are excluded from the political process, contribute to the economic development of the nation? Granted that we are already doing so by presumably paying our taxes, setting up a business, following the law, sending back money to the Philippines etc.; what else can we do to accelerate the economic development of the country?

Filipinos, both back home and abroad, realize that our government officials are failing us and are simply incapable of turning the country around. We need to accept the fact that we have to do things on our own, as individuals, as a community, and as citizens. If not, future generations of Filipinos, including our children, will be handicapped by the mistakes of our generation. This piece is about doing “little” things with significant impacts.

First, think Filipino in all aspects. Whether abroad or back home, buy Filipino. Let’s try and make it both a national and international brand of quality. The past Christmas season was a good time to buy Filipino products as gifts and giveaways. Local handicrafts, art pieces, foodstuffs, drinks, etc make very attractive and memorable gifts. Significant multiplier effects are achieved buying corporate gifts from NGOs or charitable institutions (tribal groups, home for the aged, sick, orphans, refugees etc.). With a population of 80+ million and approaching 8M overseas, Filipinos have significant purchasing influence on the local economy.

As an expat abroad, use Filipino products as much as possible. Using a Barong Tagolog in a sea of suits, or smoking a Tabacalera cigar instead of the South American varieties are good conversation starters and promote local products. Your foreign friends or neighbors will always appreciate a bottle of Tanduay, Philippine coffee, or even lambanog that now come in well-packaged boxes. Promote health and one of the country’s best products by buying, giving, or distributing extra virgin coconut oil (EVCO).

A number of Filipino friends in the U.S. have adorned their homes with Filipino paintings, art pieces, and books. This is a very good way of not only promoting Filipino culture and history, but also supporting the artistic and literary communities back home.

Second, a stumbling block to national development is that concerned citizens and the conscious middle class are isolated from one another. EDSA 1 and 2 brought various groups together to depose despots and corrupt leaders. The dynamics that led to this people power must be harnessed for economic development. We need to network with as many groups all over the country and abroad to achieve this. The least we can do is to start and keep the discussion alive. The expat IT community has a very active e-group (Fil-IT@yahoogroup.com). This must be replicated in the other professions and then all networked together some way.

A result of this networking maybe that expat Filipinos will be encouraged to invest (either by themselves or their organizations) in the Philippines, while those back home could work with expat Filipinos to export Filipino products. I am not talking big business here, but small businesses that could be grown. EVCO, Filipino handicrafts, Filipino literature, foodstuffs, drinks, etc are some of the small-businesses that come to mind. Health related products, for example, will be in demand in the U.S. as the population ages (70M+ retiring by 2010).

Third, the country needs to encourage small businesses all over the country, while at the same time ensure a local and stable supply of food. If we can make food prices affordable similar to Thailand, then it can free up funds to invest in other economic activities. A U.S.-based batchmate, has decided recently, to invest in an aquaculture project in the Philippines. Villages and subdivisions, for example, can organize and commit to buy a certain amount of organic vegetables weekly from a farming community in the province (transport and storage needs to be addressed). Tourist resorts should be encouraged to buy local as much as possible and so on.

Middle class citizens are members of various organizations, be it professional, civic, or community. Harness these organizations to do two things: a) generate livelihood activities for the poor in YOUR community; b) invest in education of the youth. The middle class (us) is educated and conscientious. Hence, the burden of simultaneously addressing the current economic malaise and investing in the future lies with us. The Gawad Kalinga (
http://www.gawadkalinga.org) project of the CFC is one of the best community development models I have seen, because of its holistic and integrated approach.

Another example is the non-governmental organization (NGO) Linis Ganda (Clean and Beautiful), which was organized in 1983. With 572 participating junk shops, 1,200 eco-aides, 2,500 bodega helpers and drivers of 132 trucks and jeeps, and 17 primary cooperatives, the NGO generated 182,051,000 kilos of recyclables from 450,000 households in year 2002, which were sold, earning it 231.6 million Philippine Pesos (PhP) or US$4.21 million (US$1=PhP55). This was an increased of PhP74.4 million increase from year 2001. Of the recyclables, 46% were paper and cartons. Total sales of recyclables have been estimated at PhP4 billion a year (US$73 million) and are clearly a significant contributor to the underground economy (DPWH SWMP, 1998).

Short of a violent revolution, how can the country develop with incompetent and corruptible government officials and politicians? Avoiding a bloody uprising by those oppressed and hungry necessitates that those of us that have a little more not only share our material blessings, but also our talents and time to provide opportunities to those that have less in life. Our officials and politicians have been deemed incapable. The country needs our help and Almonte suggests that an economic revolution of sorts from below may be a possible solution, if not a safety valve, for the impending violent catharsis the country is hurtling towards.

The point of this piece is to raise awareness and to start a discussion on how to improve the Filipino economy from the ground up. I have not proposed a complete menu of solutions and nothing raised here is new. That is for you, your friends and colleagues, family, community, batchmates, organization etc. to discuss, draw up, and initiate.

Let us turn the development model on its head and see what comes up.

Friday, November 12, 2004

The Social Scientist, Environmentalist, Activist, and four more years of Bush


Bush’s win may be because of the 3Gs- God, Gays, and Guns. I tend to think it was because Republicans had what Philippine Congressman Ronaldo V. Puno has always emphasized: grass-roots politics, prioritization of organizational structure, good data management systems, and first class strategizing and mobilization. Puno is the campaign strategist par excellence credited with winning the 1992, 1998, and 2004 Philippine presidential elections for candidates of all stripes. A September 2004 Inquirer feature on him noted that aside from working for Marcos apparatchik, ex-local government minister, and former Samar Congressman Jose Rono; Puno spent five years as consultant to big-time Washington lobby and campaign strategy firm Black, Manafort, Stone, and Kelly. There, he worked with firm partner and Ronald Reagan’s campaign manager, Lee Atwater. Puno revealed how the Republican Party manual provided instructions on every aspect of on the ground coalition building, information management and dissemination, logistics planning, and getting the vote in and counted.

Clearly, the Republican Party raised hundreds of millions of dollars, spoke with one voice, directly engaged the religious-fundamentalist, conservative, big business, and rural vote, and had outside supporters who engaged in character assassination. They were disciplined, committed, and driven to get the vote no matter what it entailed.

Elections are like marketing campaigns. Both have their own internal logic and procedures. Running and winning an election may be both moral and amoral. It takes organizational skill for both legal (grass-roots, information management etc.) and extra-legal efforts (disenfranchising voters, machine counting anomalies, trending etc.). Days after Kerry conceded to Bush, few options remain despite the largest Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to investigate (
http://www.blackboxvoting.org) the discrepancy of exit polls being accurate for paper ballot-states and inaccurate for touch-screen voting-states including Florida and Ohio, the retroactive alteration of news organizations’ exit polls to coincide with the voting machines, and access to electronic voting machines computer logs and other documents from 3,000 individual counties and townships. The lesson twice running is that one must learn how to guard one’s votes.

If Bush’s 51% win over Kerry’s 48% of the vote is an indicator of the nation’s divide, the next four years will be difficult for nearly half of Americans. Actually, the next four years will be daunting for all Americans and consequently the world. Consider the following (for those still in the dark):

· Economy. Matt Patsky, partner of Winslow Management Co. (minimum investment $3 Million), a pioneer in green investing, billionaire George Soros, and even Stephen More, president of the conservative Club for Growth are worried sick at the breakdown of fiscal discipline in Washington and the literal bankrupting of the country. Running unprecedented deficits, according to Patsky, will ultimately affect the markets in a profoundly negative and significant way, especially if foreign investment in the U.S. moves out because of declining confidence in the U.S. economy (Grist 2004);

· Religion. Conservative Christians have already voiced their call to President Bush to implement the conservative agenda soonest. Richard Viqueire, “the dean of conservative direct mail”, and others such as Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Culture of Life Foundation, Phil Burress and others expect a “revolution” to pass amendments banning embryonic stem-cell research and abortions and, and importantly, to remake the Supreme Court with conservative Antonin Scalia replacing the ailing Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist (Kirkpartrick/NYT);

· Safety nets and Big Business. Conservative strategists are pushing for the further dismantling of the country’s welfare and safety nets such as repealing the estate tax, radical tax reform, privatizing Social Security and other government services, expanding health care and investment savings account, restricting medical and other liability lawsuits, weakening unions by imposing new disclosure requirements, etc. (Economist, Kirkpartrick/NYT);

· Science and Environment. Early this year, the non-profit Union of Concerned Scientists came out with a 46-page document (http://
www.ucsusa.org) entitled “Scientific Integrity in Policymaking An Investigation into the Bush Administration’s Misuse of Science”. The document castigates the Bush Administration for a slew of actions including: a) suppressing, censoring, and/or distorting climate change research, mercury emissions from power plants and multiple air pollutants; b) distorting scientific knowledge on reproductive health issues, HIV/AIDS, breast cancer, and airborne bacteria; c) misrepresenting evidence of Iraq’s aluminum tubes; d) manipulating evidence on the Endangered Species Act, scientific process on Forest Management, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rulemaking on “Peer Review” processes; e) undue industry influence on the Lead Poisoning Prevention Panel, Work Safety Panel, and unqualified or conflict of interest issues in the Senior Advisory (Science) Role to the President, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Reproductive Health Advisory Committee, Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS, and National Institute on Drug Abuse; and f) Dismissal of Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Panels, National Nuclear Security Administration Panel, Arms Control Panel, among others.

Renewed efforts to open more of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the Tongass National Forest, the Rocky Mountain Front, etc. to oil exploration and drilling and/or logging etc. have already began or are expected.

· Foreign Policy. An exit strategy for Iraq and Afghanistan is not in the offing for the near future. On the contrary, with a new mandate, Bush has vowed to take an even more hardline stance against insurgents in both countries, so expect more casualties on both sides. The prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, reports of a study estimating 100,000 Iraqi casualties to date. Of course, we know of the over 1,000 U.S. dead military men, but no one seems to know of unintended consequences of war such as the sexual harassment of an estimated 10,000 U.S. military service women serving in Iraq (National Public Radio).

Europe and Asia anxiously await how Bush will address the nuclear plans of Iran (which claims to be surrounded by nuclear-tipped states) and bankrupt North Korea. Paul Weyrich of the conservative Heritage Foundation calls for a national debate on the U.S. foreign policy.

The world also awaits U.S. action (or inaction) on the Kyoto climate change treaty, the International Court of Justice, international human rights commission, Darfur crisis, etc.

Notwithstanding the depressing looks and jokes of migrating to Europe, Canada, or an island in the Pacific, progressives and even compassionate conservatives have much work to do.

For one, as economic anthropologist Jim Greenberg and others have noted, progressives and social scientists will need to resolve their anathema of engaging people and organizations that do not share their views. In fact, Rabbi Michael Lerner encourages progressives to wear their religious/spiritual Left on their sleeves in recognition of millions of Americans who “feel betrayed by a society that seems to place materialism and selfishness above moral values”. Lerner, national co-chair of the interfaith organization Tikkun Community in SF, exhorts Democrats to get over their elitist self-righteousness and contempt for those who voted Bush. Insightfully, he notes that the last time Democrats had real social power was when they linked their legislative agenda with the spiritual politics of the late Martin Luther King.

Thus, progressive and socially-conscious scholars should be able to engage the religious conservative and understand what their concerns are. Republicans seem to be good at listening or appearing to be listening to these groups. Progressives, actually fundamentally good listeners, should be able to do so as well.

Others urge progressives to work with compassionate conservatives to reign in the perceived war mongering, deficit-growing, environment-bashing, labor-exploiting agenda of the neo-conservatives clique in the administration.

Out of power, Yvon Chouinard, founder and owner of Patagonia, and of
1% for the Planet, a program that donates 1 percent of companies' profits to grassroots environmental organizations, suggests that everyone should put their hopes in civil democracy. He urges all to be active in one of the 100,000 NGOs worldwide working on ecological and social sustainability.

Anthropologist Richard Nelson; John Passacantando, executive director of
Greenpeace USA; Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club; Laurie David, trustee of the Natural Resources Defense Council and cofounder of The Detroit Project; Julia Butterfly Hill, founder of the Circle of Life and two-year redwood tree sitter-protester; David Orr, Chair of the environmental studies program at Oberlin College and author; Martha Marks, founder and president of REP America, the national grassroots organization of Republicans for Environmental Protection; Alison Deming, author and associate professor in creative writing at the University of Arizona; Christina Wong, recent winner of the 2004 Brower Award for young environmentalists and University of California-Berkeley conservation and resources studies major; Peggy Shepard, cofounder and executive director of WE ACT For Environmental Justice (West Harlem Environmental Action); Paul Hawken, environmentalist, entrepreneur, journalist, and best-selling author, founder and director of the Natural Capital Institute; and, Scott Sanders, the author of numerous books, including The Invisible Company, Writing From the Center, and Staying Put, all urge everyone to organize and speak up, when no forests are left behind, when the air and waterways are choked, when human and labor rights are violated, when power is exercised and responsibility ignored. Speak up not only as individuals, but also as institutions (Grist 2004).

Thus, progressives will need to act. They say that every generation has to suffer from war or economic dislocation and must rebuild from the destruction. However, many will need assistance, even those one disagrees with. Progressive convictions must be put into action. If the deficit and economy further worsen, protected areas cleared for exploitation, disasters occur because of environmental degradation, minority, women, and immigrant labor continue to be exploited, more lose health coverage, more suffer from preventable illnesses, more casualties in Iraq occur, and the problems of the nation become systemic; civil society must be robust enough to not only push for meaningful change, but also support those sectors and persons adversely affected. As a Chilean anthropology graduate student asked, how will Americans respond when society's contradictions demand resolutioin?

Sometimes it is in engaging those that are the weakest, as well as those we differ with that meaningful change can be achieved. I know it is possible when I look into the eyes of a dear friend, a still active 75-year old Filipino Jesuit priest who became a 50-year missionary to Japan right after World War II.


Saturday, October 23, 2004

Response to Dr. William O Beeman’s email defending the AAA Board’s decision to move the AAA conference to Atlanta

Prof. Beeman, thank you for your quick response. No offense was intended to anyone, but we have different perspectives on what constitutes the moral thing to do (the word was used appropriately I argue). In fact, in my first email, I wrote; “Does the AAA-Hilton contract state that AAA is committed to uphold the contract despite the negative publicity to AAA and the respective participants personally from crossing the picket line? In other words, in signing the contract with Hilton, did it mean that the legitimacy of AAA as a “moral, ethical organization” should be disregarded? Why should AAA take the flakfor the collapse of Hilton’s labor-management relations?”

It is understandable that being in the AAA Board, your and the Board’s primary concern were the interests of the AAA and the participants to the conference. On this point you and the Board have done well and I have publicly acknowledged that in my first email last week.

However, the lockout of 4,000 minority, women, and immigrant workers living on strike pay with a bleak future (and a freezing one at that) and unaffordable insurance plans is no trivial matter. That the strikes and lockouts are spreading across the country shows that the conflict between hotel industry giants and labor is deep seated.

Principles should be consistent at all levels. The war on labor and collective rights is just as important as an unjust war. Afterall, the union and most of us are also against the war in Iraq.

Shifting the financial burden to participants (despite the planned financial assistance) rather than the organization is also a moral choice, which you and the Board decided on, and which we disagree with.

Before I wrote the previous email, I was wondering if all the emails that were going around were reaching the right people. The environmental and medical anthropology list serves, as well as the graduate listserves were filled with numerous suggestions and strategies for a “win-win” approach to the situation (including comments on the propriety of the survey/vote). My first two emails raised questions and suggestions similar to and pre-dated Rob O’brien’s comments. These were based on Tom Sheridan’s forward of the AAA Board’s request for comments and suggestions.

Why all these emails, including the offers from San Jose and the request of the Union to support their struggle and move to San Jose, did not presumably reach you and the Board should be explored.

Thus, as you and the Board are dismayed by our counter-actions, we who are against the move to Atlanta and the Board’s decisions were also surprised and dismayed to read about the process and timing of the Board’s decisions. As you know, the Board’s decision reflects on all anthropologists, especially those engaged in women, labor, health, human rights, public anthropology etc. studies.

I disagree that we move on and prepare for the next “battle”. Contrary to what the Board thinks, the move to Atlanta seriously compromises the integrity of the conference and the credibility of the organization. The fact that it is a non-unionized hotel during this time of hotel industry-labor conflict makes it even worse.

As I wrote, by force of circumstance and not of it’s making, the organization (and the conference) was placed in this moral dilemma. It should rise to the occasion. The AAA needed to tread carefully by ensuring that the consultative and decision-making processes are transparent and as participatory as possible.

The AAA indeed faced considerable time constraints, but all parties concerned understood that there were extraneous factors at work. The pressure most likely would have come from the Hilton, but the Board should have had more faith in the support that the anthropological community could have given it. Not doing so will only sow internal conflict not only with the organization but also in the wider anthropological community. A boycott and picket movement is being launched and already someone has emailed suggesting a class action suit against the AAA for the planned move to Atlanta.

The anthropological community needs to come together in this instance, but it needs to come together in support of minority, women, and immigrant labor rights. These are our friends, relatives, and countrymen. We should help them in their struggle for their rights.

Lastly, you may want to read the attached email from a MESA-graduate student complaining about the lack of transparency in the MESA Board regarding the same issue. Should you wish to read my previous emails, these have been posted at
http://AAAUnite.blogspot.com.

Sincerely,


Hecky Villanueva

____________________
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:23:26 -0700 (PDT)From: Afra Al-Mussawir Subject: [GRADFORUM:2076] RE: mesa conference in nov in sfTo: newhall@u.arizona.eduCc: MESA , aaamessnl ,
mlowder@EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU, mesana@u.arizona.edu, Gradforum , imanners@uts.cc.utexas.edu, kamrana@mail.utexas.edu, asdar@mail.utexas.edu, s.wilson@mail.utexas.edu, self
Reply-To: gradforum@lists.cc.utexas.eduSender: owner-gradforum@lists.cc.utexas.eduTo newhall@u.arizona.edu


Dear Dr. Newhall,

Thanks for your prompt response!I am dismayed that I had not heard anything about this situation fromMESA and would not have been aware of it except for my participation inAAA. Many student members of MESA were apparently equally in the darkabout this, and I’ve even heard from a professor who was not aware thatthe Hyatt Regency in SF is one of the hotels being struck, though hecares very much about this issue.

You mentioned in this email to methat “Members will be informed of the situation” but I do believe thatthis should be done in a timely manner ñ i.e. now! ñ to give peopletime to make their decisions about whether to attend (i.e. cross picketlines), to change their hotel plans (especially if they had intended tostay in one of the hotels being struck), or even “just” to discuss thesituation and the ethical questions involved. The sooner we makecancellations/ changes, the less we are personally liable for.

I fully appreciate the situation MESA finds itself in; as youmentioned, a lawsuit and huge financial penalties could destroy theorganization. I truly do not want that to happen as I think MESA hasplayed and will continue to play an important role ñ especially as wehave seen in recent times ñ in combating prejudice(s) within governmentand within the public (e.g. as regards federal funding and oversightissues) and in taking official positions on certain issues (e.g. therestriction of visas to the US for academics who are not citizens orpermanent residents of the US).

And yet, MESA also has an important role to play in thesecircumstances. I find that our “right to choose” (your own words!) asindividual members of MESA in this case has been compromised by MESAorganizers’ lack of forthrightness about the situation; we cannot”choose” if we do not know there is a “choice” to be made! I wouldheartily appreciate an official and public statement of disclosure fromMESA ís Board of Directors on their position and decisions, as well asthe reasons for those decisions and an explanation of thedecision-making process.

You and other MESA officials should be aware of measures that have beenrecommended to AAA to avoid getting caught in such a dilemma in thefuture, and MESA should consider adopting similar policies, including:

-to favor living wage municipalities and unionized hotels in choosing future meeting venues,-to seek a strike cancellation clause in future contracts with meeting hotels, and;
- to purchase cancellation insurance to cover future meetings.

To this list I would add:
-for MESA to make major decisions and decision-making processes (such as involved here) public to its members,
- to adopt some policy regarding collecting input from MESA members on such issues, and,
- to alter MESA’s no-show policy so as not to penalize those who boycott the annual meeting(s) for matters of principle such as this.I feel this last point is important.

While you state that individualshave the right to choose whether or not to attend this year’s annualmeeting, MESA’s policy states that a no-show on the part of a presenterwill be penalized by not being allowed to present in the followingyear’s meeting; if a proposed presenter at this year’s meeting decidesto boycott this year’s meeting at the Hyatt in San Francisco, wouldhe/she still be penalized as a no-show?

While I am well aware that MESA plans for and contracts for annualmeetings several years in advance (and so enacting these recommendedpolicies may not have real effect until years into the future), Ibelieve that consideration of and adoption of these measures wouldimprove the ethical position of our organization. At the very least,it will clarify MESA’s position to our members and to managers/ ownersof potential meeting sites.I hope to hear from you on these points, and I feel that a generaldiscussion ñ of both the long-term and the short-term issues ñ isdesirable right now.Eagerly awaiting your reply,

Sincerely,

Afra Al-Mussawir
Graduate Student in Anthropology and The Americo Paredes Center for Cultural Studies
The University of Texas at Austin

cc: MESA-GSO listserve AAA listserve for students in the Anthropology of the Middle East (AAA MESSNL), Mark J. Lowder, MESA, (mlowder@EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU)"MESA" (mesana@u.arizona.edu)UT graduate student listserve for Anthropology students Professor IanManners, Chair of UTís Department of Middle East Studies(imanners@uts.cc.utexas.edu)Professor Kamran Aghaie, UTís Department of Middle East Studies(kamrana@mail.utexas.edu)Professor Kamran Ali, UTís Department of Anthropology (asdar@mail.utexas.edu)Professor Sam Wilson, Chair of UTís Department of Anthropology(s.wilson@mail.utexas.edu)

________________________________

Prof. William O. Beeman's reply

I am writing you as an individual, not representing the board, since no one else seems to be on line right now.

When the board made its decision on Thursday, none of the offers from the SJ convention and visitors bureau were on the table-I only heard of this $450,000 offer today, and I don't even know if it is a legitimate offer. Certainly we have not heard anything about it from AAA headquarters. To whom was the offer presented and under what circumstances? Moreover, the room arrangements for San Jose were due to expire on Monday--and we have heard nothing at all about an extension of that deadline. These last minute deals could possibly have made a difference on Thursday, but they are coming too, too late!

The AAA board was under tremendous time pressure to both satisfy the numerous individuals who refused to cross picket lines, and to be stewards of the AAA finances and of the integrity of the annual meeting. Taking a 1.2 million dollar hit was an option, of course, but such a drastic financial action could not responsibly be taken by the board without approval of the entire membership, and there just wasn't time to poll any more than we did. As it was, we took a very audacious financial step in moving to Atlanta. We moved forward with the Atlanta plans with real trepidation because of the financial burdens it would impose on our least wealthy members. The board has moved to set up a special fund for graduate students, foreign visitors and I believe adjunct faculty to offset the costs of moving. I will be the first to contribute.

Added to this was the logistical dilemmas and the additional costs imposed by the San Jose venue, which would require the meetings to be spread over five properties--meeting rooms revised, the whole program reprinted, etc. The AAA staff was reeling at the prospect. Having organized several large meetings, I can tell you that this is not a trivial affair. Just the need for thousands of rooms alone restricts the venues we can consider. The Atlanta venue relocates the meeting to a single property, just like San Francisco, and is scheduled for the same days of the week, just like San Francisco. If we had an army of volunteers to aid the AAA staff, that might have also made a difference in the Atlanta decision, but again--no time to see if it was possible.

Finally, you should all know that the union in San Francisco was satisfied--even pleased by our action, and that no matter where we went or what we did, we would have to use the facilities of the hotel chains that were locking out the hotel workers. We would have had to use Hilton property in San Jose as well, along with the properties of all the other big chains participating in the lockout. No moral victory there!

I seriously suggest that everyone channel their energy into fighting the next battle. You can bet that we will be discussing these plans most earnestly at the meetings. This struggle will not go away. We will now face it every year. Robert O'Brien made some excellent suggestions for policy changes that will protect our organization and our integrity, including revising our meeting schedule (planned a decade in advance!) to reflect corporate labor policy. This strike could not have been foreseen when the original contract with Hilton was signed.

I am living in San Jose this year. I love the city, ink it is a fabulous place for a convention with lots to do, great restaurants and easy access. It also has some very enlightened civic policies. I suggested it as an alternative venue immediately, but the problems in moving here were just insurmountable.

Finally, please be careful with the word "immoral." Once you use it inappropriately against your colleagues who are doing nothing more than trying desperately to act in the best interests of all, it loses its force for things that are truly immoral, like the war in Iraq.

William O. Beeman
Professor, Anthropology; and Theatre, Speech and Dance
Brown University
Providence, RI 02912
Tel: (401) 863-3251
http://www.williambeeman.com
(2004-2005 Visiting Professor, Cultural and Social Anthropology,
Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305)

Protest actions on the AAA decision ot move the AAA conference to Atlanta

This weekend provides a window of opportunity for those who believe that the AAA conference should be held in San Jose as a sign of support to the struggle of labor to protect their collective rights. Although the AAA Board and its officers have informed us that it has agreed to the Hilton proposal to move the conference to a non-unionized hotel in Atlanta in December 2004; most probably no contract has been signed yet (If ever one was signed, contracts can be broken too). A massive show of displeasure at the AAA Board for hastily deciding to relocate/ postpone the conference needs to be achieved.

Further, and I am risking myself by saying this, the discussion, at this point, needs to be expanded to include constituents of anthropologists and this means labor, health, educational, media, academic etc. sectors. Pressure must be laid to bear now not only on the SF Multi-Employer Group (MEG) but the AAA Board to do the moral thing NOW. As already stated/ emailed to you, please support the protest actions by doing the following:

1. Organize ourselves. Many anthropological sections and e-groups/listserves exist. For those that I am participating in, many have voiced opposition to the relocation/ postponement. However, these messages are not reaching the wider anthropological community and the general public.

· Rob O’brien has set up a blog to consolidate all messages. Please visit the blog at
http://AAAUnite.blogspot.com, leave your comments and suggestions and vote on the mini-poll they set up. These will be forwarded to the AAA Board.

· Vanessa deKoninck [mailto:
vdekoninck@UCDAVIS.EDU] has also set up a petition online website. Please visit this site at http://www.PetitionOnline.com/2004AAA/petition.html, vote, and leave your comments.

You need to visit BOTH sites. The blog will also be a future reference for anthropologists who want to review and study the actions of the AAA and anthropologists during this period of moral dilemma.

2. The messages you will leave at both sites should also be sent to the following:

· AAA Executive Board


President:Elizabeth M Brumfiel- ebrumfiel@northwestern.edu
President-elect:Alan Goodman- agoodman@hampshire.edu
Archaeology Seat: Carole Crumley- crumley@unc.edu
Biological Seat: Linda Wolfe- wolfel@email.ecu.edu
Cultural Seat:Deborah Heath heath@lclark.edu
Linguistic Seat: William O. Beeman- william_beeman@brown.edu
Minority Seat:Norma Mendoza-Denton- nmd@u.arizona.edu
Practicing/Professional:Dennis W Wiedman- wiedmand@fiu.edu
Student Seat:Jason González- jgonzalez42@earthlink.net
Undesignated #1: George Marcus- marcus@rice.edu
Undesignated #2:Judith Temkin Irvine- jti@umich.edu
Undesignated #3:Linda Bennett- Lbennett@memphis.edu
Undesignated #4:Andrea Wiley-wileyas@jmu.edu
Undesignated #5:Geoffrey A Clark gaclark@asu.edu
Ex-Officio/Section Assembly Convenor: Dan Segal- dsegal@hal.pitzer.edu


Ryan Adams (
rtadams@indiana.edu) has just emailed saying the offer of financial consideration from the San Jose Visitors Convention Bureau has been increased to $450,000. The AAA must seriously consider their offer!

For ease in pasting, just copy and paste the following:
ebrumfiel@northwestern.edu, agoodman@hampshire.edu, crumley@unc.edu, wolfel@email.ecu.edu, heath@lclark.edu, william_beeman@brown.edu, nmd@u.arizona.edu, nmd@u.arizona.edu, wiedmand@fiu.edu, jgonzalez42@earthlink.net, jgonzalez42@earthlink.net, marcus@rice.edu, jti@umich.edu, Lbennett@memphis.edu, wileyas@jmu.edu, gaclark@asu.edu, dsegal@hal.pitzer.edu

· UniteHere labor organization- Statement of Support or provide them a copy of your statement. They are under siege now and need any kind of support.

Chris Chafe,
cchafe@uniteunion.org
Amanda Cooper, acooper@uniteunion.org

3. The labor crisis is becoming systemic. Lockouts and/or strikes / sit-downs have occurred in SF, Atlantic City, Las Vegas, Boston among others. LA hotels unions are voting whether to strike. It seems the conflict is classic industry giants vs. labor and vulnerable groups. Hence, the media nationwide should be appraised of what is happening. Please send them a copy of your comments as well. Also write your local newspaper, alternative magazine, and other blogs. The following have written articles about the labor incidents. The others are suggested papers to write to. If you have other email addresses to include please send them to us.

· Boston Globe: Diane E. Lewis can be reached at dlewis@globe.com.
· Philly News: Contact staff writer Jennifer Moroz at 856-779-3810 or
jmoroz@phillynews.com. SF Chronicle.E-mail George Raine at graine@sfchronicle.com.
· LA Times c/o Ronald D. White at Ronald.White@latimes.com . (for other LA Times writers, email them using Firstname.Lastname@latimes.com )
· SF Examiner at
letters@examiner.com
· SF Chronicle: E-mail is best. Send to forum@sfchronicle.com and put "For Open Forum" in the subject line.
·
Jenny Strasburg, Chronicle Staff Writer: jstrasburg@sfchronicle.com
· Tucson Weekly: EDITOR:
Jimmy Boegle: jboegle@tucsonweekly.com
· SENIOR WRITER:
Jim Nintzel: jnintzel@tucsonweekly.com

dlewis@globe.com, jmoroz@phillynews.com, graine@sfchronicle.com, Ronald.White@latimes.com, letters@examiner.com, forum@sfchronicle.com, jstrasburg@sfchronicle.com, jboegle@tucsonweekly.com, jnintzel@tucsonweekly.com

4. Interest groups: If you are a member of a minority, immigrant, or women’s group, inform them of what is happening. Send them a copy of your comments. Below is a brief profile of the UniteHere Local 2 workers.

From the article: Workers at a glance
Local 2 represents 4,000 locked-out hotel employees in San Francisco.
Total membership: 12,000 (9,000 in San Francisco, 3,000 in San Mateo County)
Average age: 41
Average wage: $26,000, for non-tipped workers such as housekeepers, cooks and dishwashers.
Ethnicity: One-third Asian, one-third Latino, one-third other (including African American and white)
Average tenure at current job: 11 years*
Average workweek: 35 hours
* For career hotel workers, excluding temporary and transient workers
Source: Unite Here Local 2, San Francisco

Compare this with the Hilton Hotels Corp. a publicly traded corporation (HLT), which had revenues for the first six months of 2004 rising 9% to $2.06B, with net income rising 78% to$112M. It forecasts continued growth until 2010. Stephen F. Bollenback, Co-Chairman and CEO of Hilton earns $3.1 M a year with stock options of $34Million. Hilton’s President and COO, Mathew J. Hart, earns $1.12 Million a year with millions as well in stock options. They can well afford healthinsurance.

Hilton Contact details:
Corporate Media Inquiries/Community Affairs
Hilton Hotels Corporation - Beverly Hills, California

Kathy Shepard - Vice President - Corporate Communications- kathy_shepard@hilton.com
Candace Hollis - Manager - Corporate Communications candace_hollis@hilton.com

The window of opportunity exists for anthropologists to act. By force of circumstance, anthropologists have been placed in this situation. What are our priorities, financial security or social justice? Can a middle ground be reached? As Melina Magsumbol writes, anthropologists need to "walk the walk and talk the talk". We are all accountable for our statements, actions, and silence on this issue. History will judge us severely if we do not act.

"LOVE YOUR JOB, BUT NEVER FALL IN LOVE WITH YOUR COMPANY BECAUSE YOU NEVER KNOW WHEN THE COMPANY STOPS LOVING YOU" -- Narayana Murthy

Transfer of AAA conference to a non-unionized Hilton hotel in Atlanta and the SF hotel lock out

A stakeholder’s influence on a firm depends on the former’s power toinfluence the latter, the legitimacy of the stakeholder’s relationship, andthe urgency of the stakeholder’s issues vis-à-vis the firm. Further, stakeholders mobilize to emphasize individual or group identify and/or protectvested interests. Overlapping membership across relevant stakeholder groupsaffect degree of mobilization. The presence, absence, and intersection ofthese stakeholder attributes determine the degree of stakeholder salience.

Could the AAA Board and officers, its members, and those attending the AAA 2004conference have leveraged its stakeholder salience vis-à-vis the SF hotelworkers lock-out? The future will hold us, as individuals and anthropologists, accountable for how we acted when minority, migrant, and women workers practically asked for the institutional help of the anthropological community in their struggle to protect their rights to organize, secure living wages, and health benefits.

If the hotels could organize the SF Multi-Employer group and lock out theirhotel workers when one hotel went on strike, then why cannot hotel workersalign their collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) nationally? If hotel chains can organize themselves internationally, why can’t workers organize themselves nationally?

Hilton Hotels Corp. a publicly traded corporation (HLT) had revenues for thefirst six months of 2004 rising 9% to $2.06B, with net income rising 78% to $112M. It forecasts continued growth until 2010. Stephen F. Bollenback,Co-Chairman and CEO of Hilton earns $3.1 M a year with stock options of$34Million. Hilton’s President and COO, Mathew J. Hart, earns $1.12 Million a year with millions as well in stock options. They can well afford health insurance.

As I previously wrote, pressure should have been laid to bear on Hilton. Afterall, with an estimated 5,000 participants to the AAA conference, the AAA and the anthropological community, is a formidable sector. It has national and international scope. It has credibility and some form of influence.Anthropologists have families, friends, and relatives who they can also requestto support just living wages and benefits.

The AAA is an aggrieved party as the lock out compromises the integrity of theconference. Moving to a non-unionized hotel during the thick of a hotel labordispute that is becoming systemic nationwide sends the wrong message thatanthropologists, harbingers of society’s norms and actions, are insensitive to the plight of minority, women, and immigrant workers. A nuanced approach should have been undertaken before reaching a decision. This is not a "win-win" approach.

As Cristine Holmberg noted, anthropologists could have been “subversive” without AAA suffering a financial loss. For example, AAA could have clarifiedwith the Hilton what is the minimal usage allowed for it not to sue. The facilities could have been then turned over to labor organizers, activists, and anthropologists engaged with the labor sector to discuss the issues. Therented facilities could have been provided to activists and researchers to dotheir thing or even for press conferences, or debates and town hall meetingsbetween pro and anti lockout views. Paid for hotel rooms could have beenprovided to locked out workers, families who may be spending money shuttlingto and fro the “war zones”. SF will be chilly in November.

The AAA could have then pressured Hilton to agree to the transfer to San Jose using Hilton facilities. After all, the union agreed to the San Jose relocation proposal.

The AAA Board perceives a tight coupling between AAA and Hilton and otherconference sites. Hence it sees little room for strategizing. This tightcoupling should not have been set in the first place had human and labor rightsbeen in place in selecting conference sites. This tight coupling as represented by contracts should be loosened immediately.

Further, the silence of AAA, the Board and its officers, and the anthropology community (as an institution) on this hotel worker lock out is deafening.

The decision to move the conference to a non-unionized Hilton hotel in Atlanta shows how pervasive capital indeed is and how it can manipulate the temporal-spatial continuum.

MAKI BAKA! HUWAG MATAKOT! (Join the struggle! Do not be scared!).

AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOC. EXEC BOARD & HOTEL WORKERS LOCK OUT IN SF HILTON


Kudos to the AAA Ex. Board and others for their actions, thoughts, andsuggestions. While I sympathize with AAA’s looming legal and financial woesshould the conference be cancelled, I think the sober legal assessment ofAAA’s lawyers need to be taken in context. We actually have more options than we think. My comments:

1. Does the AAA-Hilton contract state that AAA is committed to uphold thecontract despite the negative publicity to AAA and the respective participantspersonally from crossing the picket line? In other words, in signing thecontract with Hilton, did it mean that the legitimacy of AAA as a “moral,ethical organization” should be disregarded? Why should AAA take the flak for the collapse of Hilton’s labor-management relations?

2. The burden of upholding the contract lies with the Hilton and not the AAA. When AAA signed the contract with Hilton, it signed on the premise that thelatter would provide first-class service. It did not include negativepublicity, potential for interorganizational conflict (with labor and supportgroups), safety issues, and emotional distress for AAA and conferenceparticipants.

3. I would like to assume that AAA only does business with legitimatebusinesses. Does AAA have a standard or criteria for businesses it deals with? If there are ethical standards for anthropologists, green standards, etc.,then AAA should have one for business partners as well. Did Hilton violateany of these standards? If so, then the contract should be reviewed with thegoal of reneging.

4. Going back to legitimacy, does the strike now compromise the legitimacy of Hilton? If Hilton’s actions on the strike are deemed immoral, unethical,illegal (by whom?), AAA, as a direct impact stakeholder, should immediatelywithdraw its relationship with Hilton.

5. AAA can demand that Hilton provide another suitable location without thestrike, but then this would weaken the moral stand of the AAA vis-à-vis theworkers. At this point, what exactly is the stand of the AAA vis-à-vis thestrike? If AAA is wary of taking a stand, it can express deep concern andanxiety to Hilton on the crisis, in effect, leaning on them to resolve theconflict in a mutually beneficial manner.

6. The point is, AAA, which has a huge contract signed with Hilton, is in aposition to pressure Hilton to deal fairly with the workers. Will AAA seize this opportunity? AAA has the power, legitimacy, and urgency to do so (withholding the payments and counter-suing, asking all AAA members to boycottHilton, preparing a critical statement, and the other actions alreadysuggested) to do so. It can demand that Hilton do the right thing NOW.

7. There is no easy way out, with negotiations and conflict resolution. AAAshould look into appraising Hilton and the workers of these discussions. Hilton will be pressured while the workers encouraged. I’m sure otherconference clients of Hilton are doing the same. They are also direct impactstakeholders and are concerned at Hilton’s actions.

8. Media will play a key role here. AAA’s actions will be scrutinized. Should it concede to Hilton and cross the picket line, it’s credibility andlegitimacy will be compromised. Is it worth the $1.3 M? I think AAA shouldlook at counter-legal actions and try to break the contract.

9. Lastly, most of the hotel workers are, aside from being from the lowereconomic class, mostly minorities, women, and immigrants. The Roman CatholicChurch as a preferential option FOR the poor, what’s AAA’s preferential option???

10. There are now 14 locked out hotels. Another 26 are on the strike watchlist. Is the crisis becoming systemic? UniteHere.org posted the SFExaminer’s report that the SF Fashion Week conference has been scrapped. Surely, AAA wouldn’t want to be compared to the fashion industry regardingdoing what is right. Here’s the quote:

”A dose of high fashion injected the ongoing hotel labor dispute Monday asworkers and owners clashed over the cancellation of The City's first-ever SanFrancisco International Fashion Week.Event promoters pulled the plug on the glitzy three-day event late Friday night,stating that the lockout at 14 major city hotels had "seriously affected" thehigh-fashion affair.Founder and producer Jacinta Law said picket lines would "compromise theintegrity of the event" and instead she would focus on a spring season show inMarch. She said the lockout would affect "designer accommodations, eventheadquarters, pre-event publicity, press junket, awards luncheon, andpost-event parties that were planned in these hotels."

The pressure should be laid to bear on Hilton and not the AAA. In the meantime,another venue should be seriously considered. Anthropologists should be able to put up with the hassles. It’s the least they could do. Cancellation or postponement should be the last resort. Professors of anthropology should also have their students study this moralityplay and write about it.