These unprecedented times have highlighted a global crisis of trust. Almost six months into the explosion of COVID-19, questions and multiple scenarios still abound. As I write, some parts of the world are easing restrictions and relaxing lockdowns while others are dealing with a second wave of the virus and tightening borders. Citizens clamour for a clearer understanding of the basis of these decisions. The pandemic has punctuated the profound inequalities in our societies and its disproportionate impact on those in the margins and most vulnerable.
In January 2016, Oxfam International released a policy paper, An Economy for the 1%, which argues that the global inequality crisis was reaching new extremes with the “richest 1% now have more wealth than the rest of the world combined,” arguing that the “fight against poverty will not be won until the inequality crisis is tackled.” In 2018, Oxfam International released a follow up report that “eighty two percent of the wealth generated in 2017 went to the richest one percent of the global population while the 3.7 billion people who make up the poorest half of the world saw no increase in their wealth.” Last year, Oxfam reported that billionaires worldwide saw their wealth grow by 12 percent even as the poorest half of humanity saw its wealth fall by 11 percent.” This was (and continues to be) the state of affairs when COVID-19 struck.
The governance response to the pandemic has been uneven. There are certainly “success” stories in countries like Singapore, Taiwan, New Zealand, South Korea and Germany, among others, with women leading and managing the response in most of these countries. In contrast, the world was witness to ambivalence, delay and draconian measures, all in the name of a “safer world.” Let’s reflect on the draconian measures, which carry with them threats to civil liberties and dire economic consequences with inequalities laid bare even more. In some countries, lockdowns necessitated the suspension of public transport. Frontliners delivering care and services who did not own or have access to private vehicles had to walk to work every single day until, in some cases, shuttle services were made available. In dictatorships and even in democracies, media freedom can be imperilled, and the pandemic has provided a framework to justify media crackdown. Layoffs, furloughs and “no work, no pay” became as “normal” as working from home. Impact on women - half of the world’s population - has been severe with increase in unpaid care work and the heavy burden of working from home while taking care of children. Closure of retail, food and hospitality industries also affected women who make up the majority of the workforce in these sectors. Hunger and food insecurity worsened. Overlapping disasters in India, Bangladesh and the Philippines compounded the issues around social distancing. Migrant workers, millions of undocumented workers, refugees and persons with disabilities also face extraordinary challenges, not to mention people battling cancer and chronic illnesses.
In the context of the differential impact of the pandemic, the question that begs an answer is: how can the policy response at the global, regional, national, and local levels ensure that we leave no one behind?
So what does the future look like? In this complex terrain of democracy, there is a public sphere where citizens and civil society can engage with policymakers and leaders. The work of organised civil society continues to be important but there are less-heard voices and informal collectives which remain in the margins. Even as they would like to engage more in civic activism and make significant contributions to policy processes, will the opportunities be more unequal in the context of COVID-19?
Undeniably, the landscape of people’s participation in governance is changing. Modes of engagements are shifting, often supported by technology. COVID-19 has engendered the ubiquitous influence of technology in the name of protection and safety. tele-health. tele-education. tele-commerce, the list goes on. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt refers to it as tele-everything. Although I’m a believer that technology is an enabler, providing tools and solutions to improve our lives, not every solution is and must be technological or technology driven.
Naomi Klein argues that “a living laboratory for a permanent-highly profitable-no touch future” is taking shape. So will this future provide more available and better access to technology to enable constructive engagement? Will technology help bridge gaps or widen them? Will technology help build robust governance institutions with mechanisms and processes that promote accountability? Will “technology-powered” democracy promote more public oversight? Will there be less difficulty by which the needs and aspirations of citizens can connect with accountable and representative political institutions in the post COVID-19 future?
In mid-March this year, I joined social media in its call for #caremongering. I tweeted that the world needs the spread of kindness in ways big and small, especially for “heroes of these times” - health workers, delivery drivers, supermarket and pharmacy staff, sanitation workers and food service providers, among others. March feels ancient and the call has certainly moved beyond kindness. In the context of the differential impact of the pandemic, the question that begs an answer is: how can the policy response at the global, regional, national, and local levels ensure that we leave no one behind? An understanding of the different intersecting systems of oppression and recognition of the various ways that gender inequality is shaped by these intersections is crucial. It is important for policy to recognise how race, age, class, gender overlap and form a web of interconnectedness. For instance, beyond the applause, what institutional reforms are on the table to compensate the “heroes of the times” more equitably, relative to the megaprofits of big business.
As we ponder these questions, lessons must be learned on the quality of governance for an inclusive policy response in times of a pandemic and beyond. As the world starts to ease the global lockdown, questions persist. These unprecedented times highlight the global crisis of trust. As community solidarity and movements rise to rescue, as often the case, governments and institutions - public and private - must be held to account.
Myn Garcia served two terms (2012-2019) as Deputy Director-General of the Commonwealth Foundation, the Commonwealth's agency for civil society.
Comments