Relationship Between The Labour Standards And Economic Development
Published:
"The modern multinational corporation is an economic, political, environmental, and cultural force that is unavoidable in today's globalised world". (Chandler and Mazlish, 2005: 19) With the advent of globalization, multinational corporations (MNCs) have emerged as the "key agent of change, the dynamic force driving global integration" that has greatly influenced the governance, politics and the world economies (Friedman 2005: 9). The phenomenal growth of MNCs since 1980s had an impact on every sphere of modern life [1] . Most visible in its economic sense is the liberalisation of international trade and free flow of capital across borders.
Today large numbers of developing countries have entered into international trade arrangements, which have significantly shaped the global patterns of trade and international division of labour. This has led to increased competition between global firms, and expansion of technologies and communications. This competition is crucial to achieve economies of scale. In the contemporary world, MNCs from the global North seek to access cheap and low-skilled labour, by outsourcing their business units on contracts to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) based in the developing countries (Mintz, 2009). Thus, MNCs are increasing their power through mergers and acquisition. They are the global firms that manage production, revenues, and investment beyond their borders along with a pool of international human resources [2] .
Although, MNCs have been providing livelihood opportunities in the host countries, nevertheless they have been engaged in Sweatshop labour in the producing countries. In recent years, these Sweatshops "have mushroomed in many Asian countries", that violate labour standards laws (Thekkudan, and Tandon, 2009). In this context, the concern to establish minimum labour standards for developing countries has raised an array of issues, relating to economic, political and moral spheres which are contentious and have not been resolved [3] .
For past two decades attempts have been made by the United States, along with other advance country governments, and the International Confederation of Free trade Unions (ICFTU), to establish multilateral rules in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to enforce higher labour standards globally. These groups demand that market access in the North should be conditioned on raising standards in the South, to avoid "race to the bottom" in wages. They also propose to take strict trade measures against countries deemed unable to maintain core labour standards. (Singh and Zammit: 2004). However, this initiative did not materialize as developing countries opposed this idea and obstructed any advances by adhering to veiled protectionist strategies. Even though, the enforcement of labour standards does not appear to be a priority for WTO, the issue of violation of labour rights remains unsettled (Chan and Ross, 2003: 1014).
This paper focuses on the emergence of the 'global business revolution' which has taken place since 1980s and the manner in which it has affected labour standards in developing countries. The central aims of the paper are firstly, to assess the key issues in this ongoing debate on international labour standards in the literature; and secondly, to analyse the ability of big businesses to improve labour standards in the labour intensive, export-oriented work force.
The paper is structured into three sections: i) an overview of the international labour standards, and exploration of the controversy around core labour standards; ii) MNCs effect on Foreign Direct Investment, Employment and Wages; iii) this section examines the evolution of global production networks and value chains; this will assess the impact of global production on working conditions in the informal sector focussing on the labour intensive apparel industry and Super Markets; iv) a brief look at the potential role NGOs to form partnership with global big business in improving standards.
In assessing the ability of MNCs on labour standards, the paper argues that, MNCs invest in selective countries that has certain level of infrastructure and thus, affects their labour standards. The paper further argues, although MNCs are the most powerful in improving the labour standards of the host countries, however, they are not the only stake holders to improve standards. The other stakeholders such as host governments, NGOs, ILO, and Trade Unions have the power to influence labour standards, hence all these stakeholders are interconnected in a complex socio-economic and political relationship.
I) Labour Standards and Developing Countries: The On Going Debate
This section focuses on the divergent views of developed and developing countries on global trade and labour standards. To understand the on going debate on international labour standards, it is important to discuss the larger economic and political context in which they exist. The battle between advocates and opponents of the standards arises from economic and political conflicts. In order to asses the ability of MNCs to improve standards, it is essential to be clear about what is meant by labour standards and why they are highly contentious.
The international labour standards are meant to be policy measures aimed at helping countries from the global south to raise their population's standard of living. This includes people from the formal as well as rapidly growing informal economy (Luce, 2005; Thekkudan, and Tandon, 2009). The contested labour standards are embodied in ILO 1998 Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, as the benchmark for measuring labour standards. According to the ILO, "these conventions are fundamental to humane working conditions in any country, regardless of level of development" (Luce, 2005: 2). For this reason, these standards can also be considered as rights [4] . Of these the following are considered to be core labour standards (CLS), i) freedom of association and right to collective bargaining; ii) freedom from forced labour; iii) the abolition of child labour and iv) the elimination of discrimination in the workplace. These standards were collectively accepted by the ILO member nation states who pledged to uphold them however they have failed to do so (Singh and Zammit, 2004). Elliot and Freeman (2003) state that, the freedom of association standard is most violated by the employers. In addition to the above CLS, Singh and Zammit (2004) have argued that the core standards should also include "the right to a decent living". Although, developing countries are the alleged beneficiaries of these standards, the idea to apply these standards has been opposed by them. This will be discussed further on.
1) National and International Dimension:
In relation to above discussion, the nations in global South argue that by imposing labour standards on developing countries will lead to the problem of comparative advantage amongst the southern countries. The diversity of labour standards between nations will create differences in factor endowments and level of income. Therefore, MNCs are inclined to invest in countries with a relative abundance of low skilled labour; as these countries will become specialized in the manufacturing and exports by improving their production methods, and lowering wages to remain competitive (wood, 1999; Mintz, 2009:44). Although the consequences of rapid growth of TNCs in the host countries has created competition amongst the southern countries which has affected local firms, one may ask what would have happened had there been no TNCs? Due to the limited space here this question will not be discussed but it is worthy of reflection.
On the other hand, Wood (2004: 1) argues that this aspect of globalization has had an impact on workers in the South, as well as the North and has encouraged a race to the bottom. As discussed earlier, For example, developed countries are concerned that trade with low-wage countries are responsible for increasing wage inequality and loss of employment opportunities in the global North. Singh and Zammit disregard this claim and argue that trade with developing countries is not the main cause for declining wages in the North. It is the labour- saving technical change which has affected the real wages of unskilled labours. Paradoxically, here the political discourse shifts to a race to the top. Bhagwati says, that importers are worried about international competition from producers in developing countries "who have lower standards, demand raising standards in these countries" (2004: 131). This approach which is politically motivated to moderate competition from rival suppliers abroad is described as "export protectionism". The strategy is applied to raise the suppliers' production cost and reduce the importers competitiveness.
The 1998 Declaration clearly states that "We reject the use of labour standards for protectionist purposes, and agree that the comparative advantage of countries, particularly low-wage developing countries, must in no way be put into question" (WTO, 1996). However, there is distinction between core labour standards and other labour standards, which also factor in 'social clauses' and are often assumed as inherent labour standards such as minimum wages, limitation of work hours, and occupational health and safety. But which in fact apply to other labour standards. The role of labour standards other than the core ones cannot be underestimated as they play an equally significant role in analysing the influence of MNCs on standard setting. Thus, "labour standards can be understood both as social regulations designed to address fairness, health and safety" issues, as well as economic measures designed to regulate wages and control movements in the market (Mehmet 1999: 90).
Another issue with labour debate over international labour standards is limited, that these standards can only improve conditions for those who are employed in the formal sector. Even the "effective labour standards [will not be able to] address alone, the issue of providing safety net for those in the informal sector" (Luce, 2005: 2). This will be discussed further.
It has been argued that labour standards interfere with free trade, which will hinder the economic growth. While NGOs argue that labour standards will be applied unevenly and marginalise vulnerable countries. Finally, some scholars note that even though labour standards are an important indicator for economic development, enforcing standards is a wrong approach (Singh and Zammit, 2004: 102). Bhagwati (1994) propose that labour standards can be achieved in favourable way through non-coercive means and with support of ILO.
The liberalisation of free trade has offered both challenges and opportunities to countries based in South. Elliott and Freeman (2003: 11) note that many developing countries are committed to improve core and other labour standards and have laws to maintain 'decent labour conditions'. However, weak economic structures, lack of resources and inability to enforce labour codes hamper the improvement of standards in developing countries (Singh and Zammit, 2004: 3). It is proposed, that as labour standards help balance the interests of workers and capital within countries and within the global economic system, workers should take upon themselves to enforce these standards through collective unions.
2) Economic Structure of Developing Country:
There is complex relationship between the labour standards and economic development. The structures of the many developing economies are not only dualistic in nature, but have dearth of financial resources. These economies have abundance of labour resource who has to make their ends meet at any cost. According to World Bank 1995 report, 61 per cent of labour force works in agriculture while rest of the 22 per cent worked in rural non-farm urban informal employment. Some Economist suggest, that significant changes needs to be made in the economic structure of these countries in order to enforce labour standards in such a large portion of informal sector workforce.
Fast economic growth can bring changes in the structural change, which may lead to job loss in the industrial sector. For example: East Asian countries today are considered as miracle countries. Easy Asia experienced fast economic growth; this resulted in absorption of surplus labour leading to shortage of labour supply. East Asia also experienced very high rates of growth of real wages as compared to international standards, but this rapid structural change led to displacement of informal sector. This quick expansion of formal economy and shrinking of informal economy improved the labour standards in terms of employment and wages of the East Asian countries (Singh and Zammit, 2003).
3) Labour standards in the Informal Sector:
The majority of the labour force in the developing countries works in the informal sector as tenants, farmers, wage labours, and self-employed small enterprise holders. The following table shows, the depiction of dual economy (formal and informal) that exists in developing countries. The table 1 illustrates the large number of workers in various developing countries work for small enterprises with 1-4 or 5-9 workers. The percentages range from 77 percent in Indonesia and to 90 percent in Sierra Leone. Whereas the labour force in the U.S. working for enterprise with less than 10 workers was only about 4 percent.
This raises issues about effective implementation of labour standards and improved wages and working conditions of these diverse groups of workers in the informal sector. Singh and Zammit note, that given the heterogeneous group of people working in the informal sector, it is particularly difficult to implement labour standards in the both urban and rural areas, and in agriculture (2004: 25). Confining labour standards to the formal sector would increase the disparity within the society (Singh and Zammit, 2004: 17). Further this will create social and economic exclusion of people who are already marginalized by being part of the informal sector. They propose to modify the ILO conventions 87 and 98 concerning freedom of association and right to engage in collective bargaining to provide platform to various organisations to represent needs of informal sector workers. In this regard, local governments can play an important role to obtain representation and redress for people working in this sector.
Hence, evidence show that improved core labour standards and other labour standards are linked with fast structural change and industrialization of the economies. Work in the formal industry is structured to provide facilities of trade union, as contrast to SMEs in agriculture and informal sector. The higher productivity in industry creates opportunities for improvements of labour standards. The evidence also suggests that employers in the industrial sector who have investment in the enterprise tend to promote core and other labour standards to increase the level of productivity and level of commitment of their workforce.
II) Global Big Business and Labour Standards:
This section analyses the influence of MNCs on labour standards in the developing countries. It focuses on theory and then on a labour intensive manufacturing sector, namely apparel retailers and supermarkets. This section will explore the effects of MNCs on foreign direct investment (FDI), employment and wages, and the evolution of the global supply chain. To this end, it will briefly consider whether multinationals are partial to investing in less developed countries that have weak workers rights.
1) Global Big Business and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Developing Countries:
Foreign direct investment has played a significant role in the integration of developing countries into globalization process that characterizes the world economy. In recent years, there has been a shift in the economic policy of the developing countries by eliminating the import substitution and liberalizing their economies (Chundnovsky, and Lopez, 2006: 72-73). At micro level, FDI has been influential in accessing international markets and integrating functions, such as marketing, distribution, obtaining technological and organizational capabilities required for producing and exporting goods and services. In this way, FDI has increased the economic competitiveness of the host countries. Stiglitz argues that, Foreign direct "investment brings with it not only resources, but technology, access to markets,… valuable training, an improvement in human capital" (2000: 3-4). However, Dunning (1993: 284) disagrees and notes that, many countries today are dependent on TNCs as providers' of resources and jobs, while TNCs are only interested in maximizing their profits.
The contribution of FDI to economic development of a host country depends not only on volume but also on quality. The type of investment, the industry and its location and the kind of assets provided by TNCs will depend on the role played by its affiliates within the global network MNCs. The developing country profile not only attracts the amount and kind of investment, but also its contribution to competitiveness, growth, human and social development. These attributes for attracting FDI compel countries to compete with each other as they fear that the investment will go to higher, more aggressive bidding country (Oman, 1998:4; Chundnovsky, and Lopez, 2006:75). This is exemplified by Malaysia's foreign investment policy discussed further on.
There appears to be a shift from North-South competition towards a gradual inclusion of South-South competition. This emerging shift is visible in labour-intensive industries in the South. The World Bank report (1995) indicated that almost 80 percent of the worlds' low-middle income countries account for the total industrial workforce. The evidence shows that "the share of manufactures in developing country exports rose from 20 percent to 60 percent between 1960 and 1990" (cited in Chan and Ross, 2003: 1014, for original see World Bank 1995: 16). Because of the mobility, MNCs have moved production and profits across national borders in order to reduce their tax burden. This has created an environment in which nations compete against each other by offering lower taxes to MNCs. Exports markets from the North have sparked intense competition that threatens labour standards in the South. Corporations "lobby national governments to acquire favours to operate their business in a tax free zone, and operate in sympathetic regulators' environment" (Chandler and Mazlish, 2005: 35). For example, Malaysia has since 1980s attracted small manufacturing operations from semiconductor MNCs and provided them tax breaks for a period of five to ten years and has issued guarantees against the formation of workers unions.
It can be argued that increased mobility of capital under liberalization and globalization puts pressure on wages and working conditions. Global corporations can intimidate workers and their organizations by threatening to exit and relocate elsewhere which can have negative implications for local workers, and their organization as well as the government itself. This can be shown from the below mentioned graph of US apparel industry. This Figure 1 illustrates the south - south competition in the apparel sector, which part of labour intensive industry. It is important to note that endowment as discussed earlier plays an important role to push one country out of the competition and brings another in. Where this pushes wages down and provides an opportunity to improve technical resources, competition at the same time creates new industries. This figure shows that when the US moved out of the apparel industry, China and Hong Kong and later Mexico joined this sector. (Chan and Ross, 2003: 1016). The figure also shows that the MNCs are always seeking to capture the emerging economies to expand their share of profits and thus influence the local industry.
Figure 1. US Apparel employment ('000s) and import penetration (%), 1939-2000
Source: (Cited in Chan and Ross, 2003, 1015; Mintz: 2009: 44)
2) MNCs Impact on Employment and Wages:
The power of MNCs today lies in their remarkable mobility. The International trade expansion has brought labour markets of developed countries in close contact with those of developing economies. As stated in the 1947 preamble of the original General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT): "Relations among countries in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with the view of raising standards of living and ensuring full employment" (cited in Harvey et al, 2000: 4; Chan, and Ross. 2003: 1012).
Even though Transnational Corporations (TNCs) employ only 2 to 3 per cent of the world's workforce which is approximately seventy-three million jobs, of which twelve million are based in developing countries (Chundnovsky, and Lopez, 2006: 83). TNCs account for one-fifth of all paid employment in non-agricultural sectors across the world [5] . This economic relationship has reaped great benefits, such as enhancing progress in the developing world through the transfer of knowledge which improves their productive capacity and attracts foreign direct investment (FDI) from the North. On the other hand, North has benefited from this trade relationship by experiencing rising standards of living.
III) Evolution of the Global Production System and Value Chains, and effects on International Division of Labour:
The past twenty years have seen a significant change in the nature of manufacturing in OECD countries (Pilat, 2006). In a short span of time, Asia has become a major exporter of labour-intensive manufactured goods, such as textiles and clothing, toys and footwear. In 2001 Asia held 80 percent of the world trade in manufacture goods which are exported to developed regions of the world. This rapid change in the balancing of the world exports has caused concerns in the North for job security and wages.
MNCs have been at the forefront in formulating the new pattern of global production and trade. In 1970s, when MNCs undertook foreign direct investment in developing economies, "a vertical integration of international production began to take shape" (Zammit forthcoming). MNCs embarked on this strategy to gain access to raw materials, capture newly emerging markets for their products, and gain advantage of cheap labour to manufacture labour-intensive products, such as textiles, and footwear etc.
During 1980s onwards, the formation of the global production system changed over to a "vertical disintegration" of production (Lall et al., 2004). With the emergence of newly industrializing countries and increasing production capacities of Southern countries, MNCs in the North grabbed the opportunity to exploit the differences in costs of raw materials amongst the Southern countries. This change in the global production system involved the outsourcing of segments of production, such as skill, capital, and echnology whereas, labour-intensive segments are placed in the lower end of the value chain in low-wage locations to curb costs. These transformations paved way for a series of global economic process: the increasing internationalization of retail activities by Northern companies [6] ; expanding corporate share ownership; increased oligopolistic rent-seeking, and brand-marketing; changes in industrial organization, and a shift from internal to external economies of scale through outsourcing (cited in Zammit, forthcoming: 9).
In this context, Nolan argues that the "global business revolution" has "changed the nature of the capitalist firm, the pattern of competition and the way in which economic production is organizing in much of the global economy" (Nolan, 2006: 1). This evolution of global business has generated competition at global level, which compels firms in similar industries to merge their resources in order to achieve economies of scale and gain competitive advantages. Thus, with these mergers and acquisitions make MNCs powerful entities to play a dominant role in the global production and trade arena.
The regulation of the new global production system and trade have been redefined under the guidance of multinational corporations and their subsidiaries, which have developed 'system integrators' in global value chains. The global retailers employ new technologies and methods acquired through mergers to exert pressure on firms in the supply chain. These system integrators possess unequal bargaining powers in the value chains, as they put pressures on the retail sector [7] . Their first tier suppliers, who are supposed to comply with requirements for 'right price' and 'right time', pass on the pressures to the bottom of the supply chain which is usually low wage and labor intensive, and therefore outsourced to developing countries by MNCs. This creates a 'cascade effect' to obtain economies of scale. Nolan argues that this will have profound implications for firms in southern countries attempting to catch up at the global level, and may create entry barriers for accessing global business (2006: 155).
From developing countries' perspective, entry into the value chain is a crucial for local corporations to have access to "the global commodity chains of core firms" located in developed countries (Nolan, 2006: 3). Due to developing countries quasi-monopsonistic position within the global production system, developed country firms set the terms and conditions of business with their suppliers, which has ripple effects further down the chain. Thus, the admission of these less developed country firms' into the value chain to capture other markets is not solely managed by the trade policies, but also by the strategic decisions of the parent firms in the value chains.
Although MNCs play a significant role in developing countries by investing in different industries and providing employment opportunities with their economic and industrial power, the governments in advance economies have exploited the 'weak bargaining position' of developing countries to create more avenues for big business (Madeley, 2008: 17). Therefore, "MNCs are not simply economic entities but part of complex interplay of factors", that has both positive and negative effects on the social and cultural environment of the host countries (Chandler and Mazlish, 2005: 3-4).
Corporate Power Practices in the Value Chain:
In relation to the earlier discussion on the global production system and value chain, this next section looks at the evidence of corporate power exploitation in the value chain within the UK retail sector. Supermarkets in the UK, like Morrisons and Sainsbury, have joined together in a pool to negotiate buying power from other European retailers. Morrisons is a member of Associated Marketing (AMS), a group of 8 supermarkets with combined sales of £40 billion (ActionAid, 2007, p. 17). There are small numbers of global suppliers for supermarkets specially, in food and clothing. For example, as a result of the Multi-Fibre Agreement (MFA) quotas, the enterprises engaging in garment production and export has increased, thus intensifying competition (Zammit, Forthcoming).
These supermarkets have immense power to extract prices from suppliers that are way below the industry average. For example in 2000 smaller retailers paid almost 9Â per cent more to suppliers than the major chains, and in 2006 the situation had further deteriorated. The large supermarkets had paid their suppliers between 15 and 20Â per cent which was less than that paid by wholesalers supplying smaller retail firms (see ActionAid, 2007). These UK retailers pressurised suppliers into exclusive trading arrangements which will not allow them to leave or switch to another outlet. Additionally UK suppliers were only provided with short term contracts of six months or less which was not beneficial. Furthermore, these UK super markets and retailers regularly switched their suppliers to avoid the formation of close relationships and loyalties between suppliers and producers and prevent competition amongst them. Even worse, these retailers selected their suppliers via auctions and issued the contract to the supplier offering the lowest price. (ActionAid, 2007:Â 18).
The Role of NGOs and other Stake holders:
The above example of UK supermarket retailers and their treatment of their suppliers is indicative of a violation of labour standards and workers' rights. These host country producers face intense global competition in global markets and therefore workers have limited powers to resist these violations. The growing exploitative business practices of large retailers and some of the transnational corporations, have been actively pursued by NGOs, student activist organisations, and trade unions. They are challenging the policies adopted by large retailers that encourage poor employment practices, lack of trade union recognition, and which create gender and wage discrimination.
Recently, NGOs have been in the forefront for raising concerns regarding labour practice by engaging in campaign called Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) established in response to the poor working conditions of Filipino garment factories producing for a Dutch clothing company. They have also been successful making MNCs adopt corporate social responsibility as essential code of conduct for MNCs' after Levis Strauss, and Nike sweatshops in the host countries, such as Pakistan and Indonesia.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, Global big business are the main instrumental force in improving labour standards in developing countries, however, their influence to improve labour standards is limited to the area of their operation, such as the countries and sectors in which they invest. Therefore MNCs are not able to influence labour standards equally in all the developing countries. It was also observed in the preceding analysis that MNCs invest in selective countries that have certain level of infrastructure. Thus, countries need to invest in good national economic and social policies that will attract MNCs to these countries. This will build infrastructure and human capital. It is also evident from the argument presented here, that MNCs invest in the countries with relatively high labor standards, thus, they are not only seeking lower wages but optimal benefit.
However, MNCs are not the only stakeholders to improve standards. The other stakeholders and their codes of conduct, such as host governments, NGOs, ILO, Trade Unions have the power to influence labour standards. All these stakeholders are tied a complex socio-economic and political relationship which makes them all the more powerful. Thus, the global business revolution has provided opportunities of livelihood to people in the host countries, but has at the same time expanded the informal economy which eventually leads to poverty and social marignalisation. Therefore MNCs and other stake holders should establish a mechanism to introduce labour standards in the informal sector. This globalization has also created competition amongst the developing countries which creates far more challenges for labour standards.
In the context of the global production system and value chains, MNCs have the power to improve standards through monitoring their supplier's practices and taking care of their workers' conditions. Additionally it is crucial for consumers to be made aware of these conditions to exert pressure on MNCs to address these issues, as they may be unlikely to do so voluntarily.
Word count: 5139/5000
Cited Bibliography:
ActionAid. 2007. Who Pays? How British Supermarkets are Keeping Women Workers in Poverty, ActionAid Report, ActionAid International, UK.
Available at http://www.actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/actionaid_who_pays_report.pdf
[Accessed on February 16, 2011]
Bhagwati, J. (1994). Free Trade: Old and New Challenges. Economic Journal, (Oxford) 5, 423.
Bhagwati, J. (2004). In Defense of Globalisation. Oxford University Press.
Chan, A. and R. Ross. 2003. Racing to the bottom: International trade without a social clause. Third World Quarterly 24 (6): 1011-1028.
Chandler, A. Jr. and B. Mazlish, (2005). Leviathans: Multinational corporations and the new global history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chundnovsky, D., and Lopez, A., (2006). Foreign direct investment, growth and human and social development, In Agosín, M.R., [et al.] (2006). (ed.) Solving the Riddle of Globalization and Development. Routledge Studies in the Modern World Economy on behalf of UNCTAD. New York: Routledge.
Elliott, K. A. and R. B. Freeman. (2003). Can labour standards improve under globalization? Institute for international economics. Washington D.C.
Dejardin, A., K. (March, 2009). Gender (in)equality, globalization and governance. Working Paper No. 92 (Policy Integration and Statistics Department International Labour Office Geneva).
Dunning, J., (1993). Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy, Addison Wesley, London.
Friedman, T.L. (2005) The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Globalised World in the Twenty-First Century, London: Allen Lane.
Harvey, P. J., T. Collingsworth, and B. Athreya. (2000). Developing effective mechanisms for implementing labour rights in the global economy.
Available at: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1472&context=globaldocs [Accessed on February 20, 2011]
Mintz, N. H., (2009). Multinational Corporations' Role in Improving Labour Standards in Developing Countries. Journal of International Business and Economy. 10(2): 39-58.
Lall, S., Albaladejo, M., Zhang, J., ( 2004). "Mapping fragmentation: Electronics and automobiles in East Asia and Latin America", in Oxford Development Studies, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 407-32.
Luce, S., (2005).The case for international labour standards: a "Northern" perspective. IDS Working Paper 250. Institute Of Development Studies, Brighton.
Madeley, J., (2008). 2nd edition, Big business, poor peoples: how transnational corporations damage the world's poor. Zed Books London & New York.
Mehmet, O., Mendes. E., and Sinding, R., (1999). Towards a Fair Global Labour
Market: Avoiding a New Slave Trade. London: Routledge.
Nolan, P. (2006). The global business revolution and the cascade effect: Systems integration in the global aerospace, beverages and retail industries. London: Palgrave.
Oman, C., (1998). "Policy competition and foreign direct investment", draft OECD development center Paris.
Pilat, D. (2006). The Globalization of Value Chains and the Changing Nature of Manufacturing. Evidence, Implications and Policies, Transcript.
Available at http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/events/bbl/06032801.html
[Accessed on February 18, 2011]
Singh, A. and A. Zammit. (2000). The global standards controversy: Critical issues for developing countries. South Perspective.
Singh, A. and Zammit, A. (2003). Globalisation, Labour Standards and Economic Development. In Michie, J., (2003). (eds.) Handbook of Globalisation. Cheltenham : Edward Elgar.Â
Singh, A. and Zammit, A. (2004). Labour standards and the 'Race to the Bottom': Rethinking globalization and workers' rights from developmental and solidaristic perspectives. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 20 (1): 85-104.
Stiglitz, Joseph. (2000). "Capital market liberalization, economic growth and instability." World Development, 28 (6), pp. 1075-1086.
Thekkudan, J., and Tandon, R., (2009). Women's Livelihoods, Global Markets and Citizenship. IDS Working Paper No.336. Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex Brighton.
Tybout, J. (2000). Manufacturing Firms in Developing Countries: How Well Do
They Do, and Why? Journal of Economic Literature, vol. XXXVIII, March pp 11- 44.
Wood, A., (2004). North-South trade, employment and inequality: changing fortunes in a skill-driven world. Clarendon Press. Oxford.
World Trade Organization (1996). Singapore Ministerial Declaration. Available at: http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min96_e/wtodec_e.htm
[Accessed on February 20, 2011]
Zammit, A. (2003). Development at Risk: Thinking UN- Business Partnerships. A joint publication by South Center and UNRISD.
Zammit, A. Forthcoming. "Value chains and decent work for women: What is to be done?" Working Paper No. 88 (Geneva, Policy Integration and Statistics Department, ILO).
Consulted Bibliography:
Zhao, L (2006). International Labour Standards and Southern Competition. Discussion Paper No. 193. Kobe University.