Quebec’ international strategies: mastering globalization and new possibilities of governance Guy Lachapelle Ph.D. Concordia University Secretary General of the International Political Science Association Stéphane Paquin, Ph.D. Research Fellow International Political Science Association Paper presented at the Conference Québec and Canada in the New Century : New Dynamics, New Opportunities Queen’s University School of Policy Studies Room 202 31 October – 1 November 2003 Quebec’ international strategies: mastering globalization and new possibilities of governance The objective of this chapter is to summarize the debates and research issues related to the impact of globalization and the crisis of the nation-state and how its redefine the strategies of the Québec governments. The Québec society has become since the Second World War, and especially in the last thirty years, a more global society which simply means that Quebecers understand the importance to act not only locally but also globally. Québec governments have adopted several policies to respond to these challenges. This chapter is divided into three themes. The first theme focuses directly on the globalization debate, on its definition, on its consequences, on the transformation of the Quebec State and the international system. Clearly, globalization is redefining the political relations between Quebec, other nations, the federal government and also between the others communities within the Canadian state. The second theme looks over the issue of governance and upon the political and sociological fragmentation between Québec, as a nation, and the rest of Canada1. Globalization is expanding the set of actions of the sub-state governments and nationalist movements, such as the Parti Québécois, have in hands several means to ensure their survival as a nation. The phenomenon of paradiplomacy translates this new objective of sub-state governments to respond of the challenges of globalization. Moreover, the processes of decentralization imposed by globalization and regional integration are resulting in Québec having more and more areas of jurisdiction but not necessary the fiscal resources to pursue its goals. The strategy of the federal government toward Quebec is clearly to limit its financial capacity. The fiscal disequilibrium between Quebec and the federal government will continue to create more tensions. If it opens the door for new possibilities of governance and strategies for the Quebec government as an international actor, it can also lead to new cooperative approaches between the Quebec government, the federal and provincial governments2. 2 The third theme concentrates on globalization and the emergence of identity- economy. Modernization brought about the idea of all-embracing state national identities rooted in both cultural and civic axes. Such identities are openly questioned and have become problematic. While being corroded by the forces of globalization they are also subject to fragmentation, competition and overlapping elements of a multiple and diverse nature. The incapacity and unwillingness of the Canadian government to recognize that Quebecers form a nation is counterproductive is an era of cultural diversity. There is a noticeable strengthening of local, regional and supranational identities. The discontinuity and dislocation of social arrangement provide that different identities relate to each other in quite an unpredictable manner. In plural societies, such as Quebec, individuals are tied to cultural references group, which might be in competition among themselves. Nowadays identities are shared in various degrees by individuals and are subject to constant internationalization by group members. 1. Globalization and the redefinition of the nation-state After the Second World War, the Quebec government was called upon to play an increasingly important role in regulating the economy. Quebec society, especially at the time of the Quiet Revolution, like most liberal democracies, agreed fairly easily on the new role of the state. It was also argued that the Quebec economy had to operate under free market practices and the protection of private interests. The Quebec State gave also itself a regulatory role in order to correct market shortcomings; it took the task of stabilizing the economy. It worked to promote full employment, economic growth, price stability and external balance. It also set itself the task of ensuring an increase in the standard of living and regional development. The Quebec government also nationalized strategic sectors of the economy (Hydro-Quebec) to ensure better control over the economy and to promote national industrial development. The importance of international trade did varied from country to country, and Canada was no exception. The Quebec and Canadian development models depended 3 essentially on domestic markets. The golden age of Fordism increased the importance of the nation-states by the degree of economic interaction within their borders. In short, the trend in Canada was to national and regional integration. The establishment of the welfare state at the time of the Rowell-Sirois Commission served to reinforce the legitimacy of the central state. The “provider state” appeared to be an extension of the nation-state by contributing to social unity and to the dissemination of a feeling of belonging to the national community fashioned by the state. From the welfare state, the population obtained material benefits simply by being citizens. The welfare state limited the negative effects of the market, which, in promoting competition, promoted exclusion. The Canadian system established meant that the federal government had almost a monopoly over international representation, that it was the only players in the international game; the diplomatic activities of the Canadian state were driven by a desire for power expressed primarily in terms of its diplomatic and military capabilities in world conflict. The role of foreign trade varied, but it was not predominant in economic strategies. The society of states also created an international scene dominated by them. This system created by states meant not only the start of the territorial state era, such as Canada, but it also suggested that only the juxtaposition of sovereign political communities was viable and it alone ensured order and security. Since then, the international community has promoted the stability of territorial communities, despite the claims of some sub-state nationalist movements. The desire was for a stable system and the cultural movements operating within the territorial states, the only guarantors of world stability, were marginalized or assimilated. The effect of the international system was then to facilitate the work of the territorial governments, such as the Canadian federal government, by ensuring greater stability for them. The international system thus, through its own construction, effectively channeled national invention. Only the territorial state could represent the nation, thus, eliminating competition by the churches3 and the cultural or ethnic communities from the international stage. 4 We acknowledged that the state-centre approach may at times minimize the influence of non-governmental actors in the governance process, and at times over- emphasize the role of the public sector in setting the course for society, by arguing that ultimately it is institutions of government which are imbued with the legitimacy to impose the stability that is required in society. The mere fact that governance structures may take many forms (local, regional, national or transnational level), and that in many instances governments do not necessarily completely control actions in both the economy and society, does not necessarily remove governance from the purview of state institutions. The state-centre perspective is therefore particularly salient, as it recognizes that governments are not dead. 2. The impact of globalization on governance: paradiplomacy and the new strategies of the Quebec governments Contemporary globalization has dropped this model and is preventing its reconstruction. The victim of globalization is the nation-state whose capacity to regulate the national economy has been significantly reduced. The Canadian State is no exception. The relationship between state power and territory is of a more complex nature than that of the period of the modern nation-state. Indeed, authority is increasingly spread among the various public and private players on the international, national, regional and local stages. Faced with all this change, the nation-state began to redefine its role in connection with market forces and with its citizens. The state changed its role as regulator of the national economy and focused on world competition. Globalization is changing the rules of the game for all the players and this situation is making room for new strategies, for new methods of operating and new possibilities of governance. The effects of globalization are recognized as the most important factor, which fundamentally impacts the government’s ability to respond to an ever-increasing number of public policy issues. As the Treasury Board of Canada argues, “globalization can no longer be regarded simply as an economic or trade issue. Its 5 impacts are widespread, and they shape choices from the environment to taxes, from social policy to the allocation of resources across sectors”4. Increasingly, the government’s activities are defined by international frameworks,