Human Security

UNIT 12 GLOBAL RESISTANCES (GLOBAL

SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND NGOS)*

Structure
12.0 Objectives
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Global Resistance
12.3 Underlying Theoretical Formulations
12.4 Resisting Globalisation
12.5 Global Social Movements
12.5.1 Resistance Movements: Types of Social Movements
12.6 Social Movements and NGOs
12.7 Let Us Sum Up
12.8 Some Useful References
12.9 Answers to Check your Progress Exercises

12.0 OBJECTIVES
This unit focuses on globalisation, global resistance, global social movements
and role of NGOs. After going through unit, you should be able to:
Define global resistance;
Discuss different theoretical formulations underlying global resistance;
Understand global social movements and how they are influencing
globalisation; and
Appraise the critical role of NGOs in the global social movements.

12.1 INTRODUCTION
Globalisation defines twenty first century. So does the resistance to globalisation.
Global resistance is a social movement with political objectives to alter or at
times counter the distortions of globalisation. Often, there are versions that oppose
the complete process of globalisation. These are variedly referred as the global
justice movement, alter-globalisation movement, anti-globalist movement, anti-
corporate globalisation movement, or movement against neoliberal globalisation.
However, most of these terms are given by the believers of economic globalisation
and hence may not sufficiently describe the perspective of the resisters. People
participating in these movements base their criticisms on a number of related
ideas. They range from opposing liberal financial/trade institutions (like IMF,
WTO, OECD), large transnational corporations having unbridled political power
through their wealth, to loss of cultural ideas and damage to environment. They
believe that globalisation has weakened the integrity of national legislative
authorities, and independence and sovereignty of many countries have been
infringed upon by liberal micro and macro-economic rule making processes at
the instance of capitalist corporations. Technology has helped both, the forces of

*Dr. Karuna Hemam Yadav, Research Associate, NCERT, New Delhi 183
Global Shifts: Power and globalisation as well as the forces resisting it. Rapid and immediate
Governance
intercommunication, beyond control of the states has empowered resisters to
stay a step ahead of the adversarial authorities. We witness number of rising
popular resistance movement all over the world since the end of the Cold War,
like the most recent Arab Spring, the world’s largest coordinated anti-war protest
against invasion of Iraq, to the rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement and the
rise of indigenous resistance movement across the world. The globalised world
faces new challenges such as climate change, terrorism, poverty and economic
crisis. These challenges having no borders and cannot be solved by any country
or inter-governmental institutions. These can be resolved only by coordinated
efforts of the forces that seek solution in globalizing and those that resist the
process.

12.2 GLOBAL RESISTANCE

Current resistance to globalisation is that it works both to counter and reform it
at once, with some social movements working for direct and participatory
democracy and autonomous communities (sometimes utilizing alternative
economic structures such as “local exchange trading systems”) on the one hand,
while others seek truly representative and democratically accountable national
and global political structures, on the other (Resisting Globalisation: https://
pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/resistingglobalisation.pdf). This has
happened against a backdrop of the spread of demands for democratisation around
the world, in the aftermath of the Cold War, and in the light of the intensifying
process of global interconnectedness. (Kumar Chanchal, et. al. 2017: 70) These
protests, which have often taken the name of the date on which they occurred
(e.g., J 16 for “June 16th”) or the central city which they have occupied (eg.,
“Battle for Seattle”), have continued to erupt outside almost every major
international political and economic meeting. Additionally, since 9/11, the anti-
globalisation movement has increasingly become associated with targeting the
militarist policies of the US and UK under in West Asia as part of a growing anti-
war grassroots movement. Mary Kaldor argues “global civil society (GCS) is
about “civilising” or democratizing globalisation, about the process through which
groups, movements and individuals somewhat can demand a global rule of law,
global justice and global empowerment”. GCS is identified as “the sphere of
ideas, values, networks and individuals located primarily outside the institutional
complexes of family, market, and the state, and beyond the confines of national
societies, polities and economies (Kaldor, 2000 )”.
Check Your Progress Exercise 1
Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) Explain how the globalisation and global resistance define the current
century?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
184 .....................................................................................................................
 Global Resistances (Global
12.3 UNDERLYING THEORETICAL Social Movements and NGOs)

FORMULATIONS
The emergence of a global civil society can best be explained through the theory
of ‘countervailing power’ developed by J.K Galbraith. In his view, emergent
global civil society is a direct reaction to the perceived domination of corporate
interests within the globalisation process. The rise of the global civil society is
therefore part of a backlash against the triumph of neo-liberalism (Buzan, 2004).
There are scholars who view social resistance as political actions. For example,
Gills (2000: 4) defines social resistance as “a form of political action which
should represent the general or societal interest and with the potential to transform
the political situation and produce a real alternative.” Then there are other scholars
who view resistance as a cultural reaction to globalisation. Chin and Mittelman
(2000: 30) write that resistance movements “cannot solely be understood as a
political reaction to globalisation. Rather, in the teeth of globalizing tendencies,
resistance movements shape and are constitutive of cultural processes.” Scholarly
differences over what resistance is,what is its scope and how it should be defined
greatly complicate the problem of theorizing social resistance. According to Md.
Nuruzzaman (2009) social resistance is neither exclusively “a form of political
action” nor as an outright “cultural reaction,” but as “a struggle for survival”
fought in the wider political, economic and social context.

Politics of resistance, it is important to note, call for the need to bring the state
back to act as a countervailing force to neoliberal globalisation, but also of suitable
new governance institutions to cope with the challenges of an interconnected
world economy. This perspective is inspired by Karl Polanyi’s notion of resistance
as “counter-movement”. This concept refers to the self-protective measures taken
by society to cope with the disruptive and polarising effects of industrial capitalism
in England during the 18th and 19th centuries. Resistance to globalisation is about
the struggles to overturn the trend towards a capitalist economy disengaging
from socially defined functions. It is about reclaiming control of the market.
Antonio Gramsci introduced the notion of “counter-hegemonic resistance” where
the resistance is about the actions of oppressed groups, or subaltern forces, directed
at undermining the power strategy used by ruling classes to create and maintain
social order in conditions of uneven capitalist development (Kumar Chanchal,
et. al. 2017:72). From this perspective, resistance to globalisation is about gaining
control of the state by democratic means in order to advance a national popular
political project and thereafter realign international political relations to transform
globalisation. It is also about contesting the accepted and institutionalised
knowledge and ideology that legitimates the common sense of neo-liberal
globalisation and its faith in the market. A promising theory of globalisation and
resistance is offered by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s Empire (2000) and
Multitude (2004). For Hardt and Negri, globalisation is characterized by a new
imperialistic logic that conducts virtuous wars and makes decisions over who is
to live and who is to die. They see it as a complex process that involves a
multidimensional mixture of expansions of the global economy and capitalist
market system, new technologies and media, expanded judicial and legal modes
of governance, and emergent modes of power, sovereignty, and resistance. Yet,
as a global order of power in an age of nation states, it transcends and is not
traceable to any particular center of power or state capital. Hardt and Negri have
engendered their share of criticism, partly for being unprogrammatic and partly
185
Global Shifts: Power and for having failed to account for the role of American exceptionalism and militarism
Governance
in global empire. Likewise, Thomas Friedman (1999) makes a more benign
distinction between what he calls the “Lexus” and the “Olive Tree.” The former
is a symbol of modernization, of affluence and luxury, and of Westernized
consumption, contrasted with the Olive Tree that is a symbol of roots, tradition,
place, and stable community. Friedman, by contrast, is less critical of globalisation
and fails to perceive the depth of the oppressive features of globalisation and
breadth and extent of resistance and opposition to it. In particular, he fails to
articulate contradictions between capitalism and democracy, and the ways that
globalisation and its economic logic undermines democracy as well as circulates
it.

(Resisting Globalisation: https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/

resistingglobalisation.pdf).

Movements of resistance are continually arising and changing, even as

technological inventions proliferate throughout the world and produce a global
media culture, while economic crises, natural disasters, militarism, and war
threaten to undermine the global order. Therefore, theories of globalisation and
resistance must ultimately remain sensitive to ongoing change, be rigorously
critical, and so overcome the tendency towards being either dogmatic or overly
explanative.

Above mentioned theoretical formulations help explain the ideological orientation

of most of these new groups and movements, which broadly favour a global
social justice or world ethics agenda, reflected in a desire to extend the impact
and efficacy of human rights. This has deepened international law, developed
citizen networks to monitor and put pressure on states and international
organizations. The global civil society has emerged as the third force between
TNCs and international organizations, representing neither the market nor the
state (Kumar Chanchal, et. al. 2017:70).
Check Your Progress Exercise 2
Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) Discuss theoretical explanations of global resistance?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

12.1 RESISTING GLOBALISATION

Resistance to globalisation refers to the gamut of struggles and actions of social
groups and individuals in response to the dislocating consequences of neoliberal
reforms and its effects in the sphere of the economy, politics and identity/ culture.
(Saguier, Marcelo, 2012) The core values of the new global social movements of
186
resistance include non-violent struggle, democratic practice, social justice, Global Resistances (Global
Social Movements and NGOs)
inclusiveness, secularism, peace, solidarity (in opposition to localism,
parochialism and narrow nationalism/nativism or chauvinism) and equality
(including opposition to patriarchal forms of oppression against women as well
as class, caste and ethnic based discrimination). There is a more diffused pattern
of ideas and organization that characterizes the new social movements with higher
participation by women. Global social movements also act trans-nationally in
order to generate domestic outcomes, but they mainly aim at changing practices
and influencing ideas and norms in world politics. Some of them expect that the
use of information, persuasion, and moral pressure should contribute to changes
in international institutions and mechanisms of global governance. Others deploy
and engage competing justifications as a political process, becoming true moral
entrepreneurs in instigating campaigns around particular issues. The Narmada
Movement in India, for example, as a coalition of local, national and international
non-state organizations has been able to reform and even stall the construction
of a set of huge dams along the Narmada River. (Transnational Social Movements:
http://socialsciences.scielo.org/pdf/s_bpsr/v2nse/a01v2nse.pdf).

There are reasons to link the resistance of today’s new social movements to a
number of historical precedents. These include earlier examples of resistance to
burgeoning globalisation such as Latin American popular education programmes
and the rise of African nationalism in the 1950s and 1960s, India’s Chipko
movement, Chico Mendes’s unionization against Amazonian rain forest
destruction, and China’s Tiananmen Square democracy movement in the 1980s,
the 56 “IMF riots” that occurred in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, Europe
and the Middle East from 1985 to 1992, and manifestations of resistance such as
the formation of the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People in 1991 to fight
Shell Oil in Nigeria, as well as the election of a self determining Government of
National Unity in South Africa and the emergence of the Zapatista Army of
National Liberation in Chiapas, Mexico in 1994. Whereas some of these resistance
movements were regionalized and based their approach in local traditions, which
they utilized to contest the negative and colonizing influences of unrestrained
capitalist development, others such as the Zapatistas have demonstrated a closer
resemblance to recent mass-mobilizations against capitalist globalisation through
their mix of violent and non-violent protest, attempts to form solidarity with a
myriad of oppressed peoples and groups around the world, and their subversion
of new media (e.g., the Internet, facebook) which they incorporate as weapons
in the furtherance of resistant goals. Undeniably, much of the resistance to
globalisation today cannot be understood apart from its use of the new
technologies associated with the Internet. Notably, since 2001, the World Social
Forum (WSF) has been held as a sort of annual counter-summit to the World
Economic Forum (WEF). With its motto of “Another World is Possible,”
attendance in the many tens of thousands hailing from over 100 countries, and
highly inclusive nature that involves diverse representatives. As a community of
social practices and political process, the World Social Forum can be viewed as
an integral part of a broader movement commonly referred to as the alter-globalist
movement, one which fights for global social justice ideals. The WSF has provided
a suitable platform for reflection on the possible alternatives to the neoliberal
globalisation model and may be considered as a group of open areas for meetings,
discussions and proposals or, as suggested by Fisher and Ponniah (2003:10) “a
pedagogical space enabling learning, networking, and political organization”.
187
Global Shifts: Power and
Governance 12.2 GLOBAL SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
It has proved difficult to provide a clear definition of a social movement, because
they are by nature, shifting entities. The essence, however, of a social movement
is resistance. This could be resistance against the status quo, in which movement
members demand basic human rights such as shelter, land and access to services,
or resistance against the future violation of their rights as they oppose government
initiatives, commonly for large-scale dam building, commercial fisheries or the
establishment of protected environmental zones in areas crucial for local
livelihoods. Schlaepfer et al (1994) define a social movement as community
mobilization around the political implications of a local problem. Social
movements’ challenges to the status quo are generally highly vocal, and members
very often posit themselves in clear opposition to government or other elites and
their policies. However, the relationship between social movements and the organs
of the state is a complicated one. Movements may very often oppose government,
but they are equally dependent upon it to redress certain wrongs or bestow rights.
Their strategic interaction with the state brings movements clearly into the realm
of the political. Foweraker (1995: 69) informs that ‘all social movements must
be defined in some degree by their political projects or their attempts to influence
institutional and political change’. Politicised social movements are often highly
radical and innovative in their demands and their activities. Movement members
search for new ways to make their views known and articulate their demands,
and can at times break the law to achieve this.
Alter-globalisation protests in global cities since the events of Seattle in 1999
have not been an isolated spontaneous series of events, but rather a conscious
tactic of an increasingly coordinated and powerful social movement against
economic and financial globalisation that often targets international
organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Through these protests, and
particularly by means of the series of forums organized since the first World
Social Forum in Porto Alegre in 2001, transnational networks, coalitions and
movements attempt to transform both domestic political systems and international
politics. They create or stir up new issues for the international agenda, mobilize
new constituencies, alter understandings of interests and identities, and sometimes
change state practices (Khagram et al. 2002).
Globalisation is also challenged from below at various levels. Individuals can
take an array of actions that serve to resist the aspects of globalisation they oppose.
For example, Jose Bove of France opposed the expansion of McDonald’s,
individuals refusing to buy global products like coca cola, Starbucks, or refusing
to ship in WalMart because its ruthless commitment to low prices often translates
into low-wage work in South. There are small, locally active, groups at the
grassroots level that oppose globalisation. There are religious fundamentalists
such as the Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS etc. who seek a return to a pure version of
their religion, and resist global processes that they think are a threat to their
purity.

12.2.1 Resistance Movements: Types of Social Movements

Various types of resistance movements at different levels have cropped up in
almost all parts of the world. Following is an overview of some of these
188 movements.
Local Movements Global Resistances (Global
Social Movements and NGOs)
Globalisation adversely affects local people in different ways. It may deprive
them of their source of livelihood, displace them from the local market etc. The
Adivasi-Dalit led Plachimada Movement to conserve and protect the sources of
drinking water at Palghat in Kerala may be cited as a good example of local
resistance. Another illustration is the bold and heroic decision taken by the
Koorachund farmers in Kozhikode to get relieved from the market penetration
of Transnational Companies like Pepsi Cola and Coca Cola.

National Movements
The struggles led by the various trade unions, farmers’ organisations and non-
governmental organisations (NGOs) could initiate some national level resistance
to globalisation in India. Similar attempts were there in other parts of the world.
The recent resistance to Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in the farmlands in
India by organised Farmers Movements may be cited as a case of National Level
Anti-Globalisation Struggle.

Global Movements
In order to counter globalisation effectively global level resistance movements
are necessary. Already a number of such movements have been organised. One
such effort is the World Social Forum.

The demonstrations that the world witnessed in such venues like the WTO’s
Ministerial Meeting at Seattle and Cancun; G-8 meetings at Genoa and the IMF/
World Bank Meetings at Davos, all reveal the global level resistance to
globalisation (Kurian: 2007).
Check Your Progress Exercise 3
Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) Discuss types of global resistance movements?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

12.6 SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND NGOS

In the context of globalisation, it is often said that civil society has assumed a
significant global dimension on the basis of transnational networks of non-state
actors, especially NGOs such as Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Oxfam
International and Medicines sans Frontiers whose memberships, common purpose
and organizational activities transcend national borders. Global civil society has
served as a source of governance through dissemination of information, formation
of open forums for dialogue and debate and advocacy of greater democracy,
transparency and accountability in governmental and multilateral institutions. In
189
Global Shifts: Power and this way, global civil society or global public spheres can help to prevent the
Governance
powerful from owning power privately (Kean, 2003). This expanding
transnational or civil society layer has often been greeted as enhancing democracy
and providing a counterbalance to the power of markets and transnational
institutions (Kumar Chanchal, et. al. 2017:70-71). Indeed, International NGOs
(or INGOs) often play an important role in international and national advocacy
campaigns, bringing together different actors from across the globe into diverse
networks. The larger charities, such as Oxfam, Save the Children and ActionAid
have departments devoted to these campaigns, for example on Fair Trade, GM
crops and child prostitution. (Social movements and NGOs: https://
pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ 80e8/f7dfb443e7f09554e4bf23fd769ec20c68cd.
pdf11).

The role of NGOs in global economic governance, and the WTO in particular, has 
been  the  focus of much scholarly attention since the so­called ‘Battle of Seattle’
in 1999.  Widely  considered to be the coming out moment of the anti­
globalisation movement, citizens took to the  streets to denounce a global
economic system that was seen to be exclusionary and unfair, and  producing
profound inequalities, environmental destruction and social dislocations
worldwide (Gill 2000~ Halliday 2000~Wilkinson 2006). In an effort to stem off
its legitimacy crisis, the WTO increased its engagement with NGOs. It is widely
argued by scholars,WTO officials, NGOs and national delegates alike that
moreopen trade policymaking processes  that include NGOs will, by virtue of
the divergence of interests represented, lead to a more democratically  legitimate
international trade system.

Obviously, some NGOs can be radical, innovative and politically combative, but
there are also clear institutional differences between social movements and NGOs.
The latter tend to be recognisable by their structure. By contrast, social movements
tend to be more ad hoc and evolutionary by nature. NGOs also are more likely to
have a set of fixed priorities, whereas social movements can often be much more
fluid, and above all reactive, as their actions and goals respond to the vagaries of
local and national politics, or the flexibility of global capital. Perhaps most crucial
for a definition of social movements is the issue of membership. Social movements
are their members. In contrast, theoretically (and sometimes in practice) NGOs
can consist of just one person. It would be hard to imagine a social movement
composed of a single individual. Social movements are highly dependent on
their members who they must keep mobilized and committed. In this sense,
movements must elicit a high level of loyalty from their individual members
who in turn bestow the movement with legitimacy. In this way, NGOs are more
likely to define their work by their official mission and organizational goals than
by their membership, if they have one. Although NGOs have taken up issues
similar to those of social movements, critics have noted a decrease in radicalism.
However, not all social movements will disappear after success or failure. In
some cases an organizational form that started life as a social movement can
emerge as an NGO, or an NGO-like entity, the SMO (Social Movement
Organization).

NGOs are seen as one of the key actors in the global economy, together with
governments and firms. The creation of a complex global economy has had effects
way beyond the international trade in goods and services. It leads to globalisation
of unions, commercial bodies, the professions which participate in the relevant
190
international regimes. Any form of international regime to formulate a policy of Global Resistances (Global
Social Movements and NGOs)
an industry, whether it is non-governmental or intergovernmental will encourage
the strengthening of the global links among the NGOs concerned with its activities.
States might differ in terms of how much independence they give to civil society
groups and individuals. But global balance of power system generally regards
non-governmental actors where they exist, as subordinate to national actors (Nau,
Henry R, 2009). Government can no longer control the flow of information across
the borders of their country. NGOs from each country may combine in four ways:
as international NGOs, as advocacy networks, Caucasus and as governance
networks. NGOs can directly affect governments, directly affect firms, indirectly
(moderate or mediate) the business-government relationship and or act as nodes
with business-government-NGOs network (Doh and HildyTeegen, 2003: 565-
66). It also influences the major decision process of the international organization.
The growth and interaction of NGOs and Inter-Governmental Organisations
(IGOs) constitute the central arena of emerging global governance.
Check Your Progress Exercise 4
Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer.
ii) See the end of the unit for tips for your answer.
1) What are the roles of NGOs in social movements?
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................

12.1 LET US SUM UP

Globalisation and its detractors in the form of locating and contesting its processes
and impact have in fact, strengthened the very process of globalisation. Theoretical
and practical questions can be asked whether the new social movements of global
resistance are capable of acting as a counter hegemonic bloc in global politics
and achieving significant transformation of the global system.
The above discussion demonstrates that global civil society provides mechanism
for global collaboration and coordination for resolving global problems. Global
Civil Society organizations (or GSCOs) give voice and stimulate debates amongst
citizens on the various global conflicting issues and make important contributions
to the democratisation of global governance. GCSOs have been able to exert an
effective influence on policy-making at the international level. These organisations
are the means of global governance and transforming the norms of international
politics through providing more effective solutions to local problems than national
governments or even international organisations, and acting as a powerful
counterweight to traditional power politics. Global civil society make citizens
more aware of global issues and play a positive and balancing role between
globalisation and the nation states. They also contribute significantly to the public
education about global governance, thereby empowering citizens to involve
themselves meaningfully in the regulatory processes and can stimulate public
debate about current and possible future courses of global governance. 191
Global Shifts: Power and The real challenge in this new wave of resistance to capitalist globalisation,
Governance
however, is to maintain the impetus to action and to global solidarity and achieve
more concrete political results. It is the diversity of the movement and their
resistance on participation, inclusiveness and autonomy that gives the new
movements their real strength. These same qualities, however, also challenge
the success of global movements to solve the problem of political representation
and organization in the new global politics of resistance. Global civil society and
non-state actors are increasingly becoming a new pillar of global governance.
Supporters of global civil society argue that they have effectively reconfigured
global power, providing a kind of bottom up democratic vision of civilizing world
order. However, the states feel that they have been able to manage and often co-
opt the global civil society. One good example of this mutual victory are the
various INGOs. INGOs have come to occupy a large space in global affairs
across many sectors – commercial, environment, human rights, etc. and
increasingly affect relations with and among governments. NGOs in this way
have also increasingly brought states to respect areas like basic human rights,
poverty, labour rights, health and environment, and, in fact states are forced to
come closer to offer global solutions.
Politically charged social movements, however, use the new force as a medium
to achieve classic goals of political overthrow and are often led by politically
ambitious individuals/leaders. At times, such movements are actually
manufactured or supported to dethrone legitimately elected governments.
The resistance movements therefore could constitute the beginning of a global
civil society of a new public sphere that might uphold progressive values such as
autonomy, democracy, peace, ecological sustainability and social justice. They
may however, to succeed in a long term meaningful way, have to be accountable,
transparent and free from personality cult. States, on the other hand have to
increasingly become adept to engage the new forces and demonstrate their
compliance with the expectations these movements cultivate among citizens.

12. 8 SOME USEFUL REFERENCES

Gills, Barry K. (2000) (ed). Globalisation and the Politics of Resistance, New
York: St. Martin’s Press.
Buzan, Barry (2004). From International to World Society?, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Kean. J. (2003). Global Civil Society?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
– ‘Resisting Globalisation’, Access on 19 th November, 2018, https://
pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/resistingglobalisation.pdf
Kumar Chanchal, Lunghthuiyang Riamei and Sanju Gupta (2017). Understanding
Global Politics, New Delhi: KW Publishers Pvt Ltd.
Kaldor, Mary (2000). ‘Civilising Globalisation: The Implications of the Battle
of Seattle’. Millennium: A Journal of International Studies, 29/4: 105–14.
Chin, Christine B. N. and James H. Mittelman (2000) “Conceptualizing Resistance
to Globalisation,” in Barry K. Gills (ed.), Globalisation and the Politics of
Resistance, London and New York: Macmillan Press Ltd. and St. Martin’s Press
192 Inc.
Mohammed Nuruzzaman (2009), Globalisation and Resistance Movements in Global Resistances (Global
Social Movements and NGOs)
the Periphery: An Alternative Theoretical Approach, Access on 10th October,
2018, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250147287_Globalisation_and_
Resistance_Movements_in_the_Periphery_An_Alternative_Theoretical_Approach
Hardt, M. and A. Negri (2000). Empire, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hardt, M. and A. Negri (2004). Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of
Empire, New York: The Penguin Press.
Friedman, T. (1999). The Lexus and the Olive Tree, New York: Farrar Straus
Giroux.
Saguier, Marcelo (2012), Resistance to globalisation, Access on 19th November,
2018, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269104537_Resistance_
to_Globalisation
Khagram, Sanjeev, James Riker, and Kathryn Sikkink (2002). “From Santiago
to Seattle”: Transnational advocacy groups restructuring world politics. In
Restructuring world poltics, transnational social movements, networks, and
norms, eds. S. Khagram, J. Riker and K. Sikkink. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press.
Carlos r. S. Milani & ruthy Nadia Laniado (2007). Transnational Social
Movements and the Globalisation Agenda: A Methodological Approach Based
on the Analysis of the World Social Forum, Access on 19th November, 2018,
http://socialsciences.scielo.org/pdf/s_bpsr/v2nse/a01v2nse.pdf
Fisher, William, and Thomas Ponniah (2003). Un autre monde est possible, Paris:
Parangon.
Schlaepfer, C. G. Rodrigues Viana and S. Moretti (1994). ‘Community
development and social movements: an experience of solidarity and citizenship
in Brazil’ Community Development Journal 29: 4.
Foweraker, J. (1995). Theorizing Social Movements, London: Pluto Press.
Kurian, V Mathew (2007). “Alternatives to Globalisation: A Search’ in
Mainstream, Vol XLV, No 35, Saturday 18 August 2007 ,
Earle, Lucy (2004), Social Movements and NGOs: A Preliminary Investigation,
Access on 16th October, 2018, , https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/80e8/
f7dfb443e7f09554e4bf23fd769ec20c68cd.pdf11
Gill, Stephen (2000). Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle of Seattle as a Moment in 
the New  Politics of Globalisation,  Millennium: Journal of International Studies,
29.1: 131­140.
Halliday, Fred (2000). Getting Real About Seattle, Millennium: Journal of  
International Studies, 29.1: 123­129. 
Wilkinson, Rorden (2006). The WTO: Crisis and the Governance of Global  
Trade, Abingdon, UK: Routledge
Nau, Henry R. (2009). Perspective on International Relations, Washington DC:
CQ Press.

193
Global Shifts: Power and Doh, Jonathan P., and Hildy Teegen (2003). “Globalisation and NGOs:
Governance
Transforming Business, Government and Society”, Journal of International
Business Studies, 2003, pp. 565-66).
Mishra, Vivek Kumar (2012). The Role of Global Civil Society in Global
Governance, Access on 19th November, 2018.
http://gjestenv.com/Current_Issue/vol_1/Gjest_1202.pdf

12.9 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

EXERCISES
Check Your Progress Exercise 1
Your answers should include definitions of globalisations, and its connection
with anti globalisation movements.
Check Your Progress Exercise 2
Highlight on Micheal Hard and Antonio Negri theory and Thomas Friedman
explanations of global resistance.
Check Your Progress Exercise 3
Your answer should highlight on local, national and global social movements
Check Your Progress Exercise 4
Highlight critical role of NGOs as advocacy and connecting institute between
people and its governance and also a central area of emerging global
governance.

194