The Hindu Business Line : India needs to be glocal

Prof. John Harriss, Director, Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics, at the recent CII Brand Summit, in Chennai, spoke about the changing socio-economic and political landscape. Excerpts from the speech.

I SHALL try to lay out what seem to me to be important aspects of the contemporary social, economic and political landscape, addressing the threats, as well as opportunities. I shall in the main leave it to you to work through the implications for marketing.

The brief that I received asked me to weave together points about `blurring geographies,' `changing cultures' and `political balance.' The present is an era of globalisation. It is certainly hard to escape the marks of globalisation in this city, particularly for anyone who knew it first as it used to be until 10 years ago.

First, the point that globalisation means, above all, greater `interconnectedness,' brought about by the integration of markets on a global scale as well as by information technologies.

But, second, the increasing interconnectedness of our world brings with it, paradoxically, the heightened significance of the local. Far from interconnectedness leading to `blurring geographies,' therefore, I believe that it is making for very distinctive geographies. These distinctive geographies carry with them very important cultural and political implications and it is these that I want to focus on. Of course, there are consumer goods, often tied to a particular brand name, that are now known throughout the world. And there is an understandable fear in some quarters of the `McDdonald's-isation' of the world — the fear that cultural and social differences are all being eroded under the steamrollers of the most successful consumer products. This is a version of the idea that modernity necessarily implies the adoption of lifestyles that have developed in the West — `Westernisation' in other words. Not necessarily so, I say, because interconnectedness also makes us aware of our own distinctiveness.

We come to value aspects of our own particular cultures, and want to invest in them.

I was struck, for example, by an item in The Hindu just the other day. It was the story of a non-resident Indian — one who has successfully ridden the waves set in motion by globalisation — a man who has written and produced Tamil plays for audiences in the US.

That's one aspect of globalisation, the spread with the Indian diaspora of Indian culture to other parts of the world. But the Houston-based Tamil playwright also intends to make a bequest to the Meenakshi Temple for the refurbishment of the priests' quarters there. Globalisation is associated, in fact, with a resurgence of interest in Hinduism, reflected also in the enormous amount of new temple building and of the refurbishment of temples that has been going on in this city. Those who are beneficiaries of the interconnectedness of globalisation, like the playwright, are often those who most value aspects of their own cultures and who want to ensure their vitality. Research that is being done in Chennai by two of my colleagues from the LSE is showing — that many of those who are employed in the best jobs in the software industry, far from chasing after Western lifestyles — as one popular stereotype of them would have us believe — actually cherish many aspects of their own cultural tradition. Interconnectedness brings greater awareness of local specificities in different ways, and though there are consumer products that have acquired a global sweep they do not erase cultural differences. Greater wealth makes it possible to sustain and develop cultural distinction.

There is a negative side to the valuation of cultural difference as well, of course, which is of enormous political importance. This is when cultural difference gives rise to narrow identity politics or, in other words, to sectarian ethnic and religious politics that bring about violent conflicts. Conflicts of this kind have been with us for a long time.

I think, for example, of the long history of conflict between the Protestants and the Catholics in Ireland. This certainly isn't in any way an outcome of globalisation. But there are circumstances that are produced by some of the phenomena of globalisation that tend to increase the possibilities of violence between the people of different cultures.

Where large numbers of men have lost their jobs, for example, as a result of the restructuring of industries that is required by the competitive demands of the global economy, they may experience a kind of personal crisis that leads them to want to assert their masculinity. Such men may find the sort of chauvinist politics expressed by extreme right wing political parties inclined to violence. I think that we should all consider the potentially or actually negative consequences of globalisation, as well as the tremendous opportunities to which the integration of markets on a global scale gives rise.

Let us consider for a moment the geography of this city. There has long been a clear geographical difference between North Madras, with its often narrow streets, large slums and large areas of working-class housing around the old mills and the railway works, and South Madras, with its leafy avenues and big bungalows.

Far from there coming about a blurring of the geography of this city in the era of globalisation, the difference between North and South seems to be becoming greater. It is in the South that the software industry is based, and it is there that the architectural spaces of globalising modernity are being created. It is there that the global city of Chennai is very clearly in evidence. There is very much less sign of the global city, however, in North Madras.

Does this matter? I suggest that it does if it is a reflection of the relative lack of opportunity for the ordinary working person. Those employed now in the IT industries amount to about 0.2 per cent of the labour force, I believe. India, it has been said, with some justification, has been experiencing jobless growth over the last 15 years or so. It is surely worrying if large numbers of people are actually being marginalised as the economy grows and excluded from the opportunities of global integration.

It is worrying also from the point of view of sustaining economic growth. India has a potentially huge domestic market for all kinds of consumer products. While it is important that Indian industry should be internationally competitive and increase its share of global markets, India like other great continental economies such as China, Brazil and the US does not have to rely on export markets for sustaining economic growth.

It isn't true that all of the most successful and most competitive companies are multinationals operating in global markets. The enormous potential of domestic markets in a country like India can only be realised, however, if people have sufficient incomes. There is a sort of a synergy, therefore, between employment generating economic growth and sustaining that growth over the longer run.

This is the challenge that has to be addressed, I think — that of achieving the sort of balanced development that stems from employment generating growth. It is a challenge in which the successful marketing of distinctive products must have an important role to play.

Turning the potential of globalisation to realise benefits for the mass of the people, as well as for a relatively privileged minority, demands action across a number of fronts. But one of them is that of product development to achieve successful industrial performance.

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Victoria's guide to Who's Who

KAM Rising!

Making the consumer connect

Defining Brand India

Judging the Brands of the Year

Brand shining ... for whom?

Can `India' be a brand?

India needs to be glocal

Rigid caste system for cars in the parking lot

Dab it!