Questioning the Values of Global Institutions

By: Seil Oh

February 23, 2015

Inequality, Authentic Development, and Solidarity

As a sociologist, I have many serious questions about the plausible “unintended consequences” of global development driven by international organizations such as the UN, World Bank, and IMF.


In his recent talk, Dr. Basu, the chief economist at World Bank, discussed GDP in regard to economic growth. Nowadays, GDP seems to be the most important foundation for human life. However, focusing on GDP can create a “one dimensional and instrumental mind" for global people, especially for the poorest and the most vulnerable. As Habermas argued, the major problem of contemporary globalization is that our life-world has become more and more "imperialized" by the systems of neoliberal capitalism. Social scientists are more and more concerned about “quality of life” beyond GDP, since GDP is a very narrow and one-dimensional measure for the overall social research. Without respect for national sovereignty and support for democratic procedures that require “institutional accountability,” global organizations like the World Bank may do harm to indigenous people in poor countries. How and through whom the World Bank wishes to support poor people should be clearly accountable. Otherwise, economic support of the initiatives of global organizations can make poor countries become prey to powerful foreign companies aligned with the international political apparatus. In this regard, the principle of “subsidiarity” from Catholic social thought is vitally important for application in the actual world.

Regarding technology, values, and development, the most serious problem seems to be how to overcome “instrumental rationality” which underlies many types of modern development. According to Max Weber, a profit-driven development leads to a formal rationalization merely of “means.” An alternative, substantial rationalization would concern “values” as goals. The propagation of modern technology depends on two humongous interest groups: 1) scientists who claim “academic autonomy” without regulations; 2) entrepreneurs and companies who are always interested only in “profit-making,” especially by the use of patents within free markets. Both of these interest groups are closely collaborating for their common goals, such as profit-making and deregulation. In this way, whether to allow poor people to utilize GMOs (genetically modified organisms) can be a very practical question. Without due institutional accountability, global organizations would make important decisions only through the political and economic alliances between politicians and multinational corporations. This, then, becomes a new type of imperialism in the name of humanitarian support. Therefore, the World Bank should ask: “What is the primary value?” in order to make our world free from poverty. This question should be practically connected to the “common good” and “subsidiarity.”
Opens in a new window