UNU-CRIS Working Papers W-2008/4 SOCIAL DIMENSION OF INTEGRATION: GUIDELINES FOR AN ACTION PLAN IN THE AREAS OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT * SELA * Paper prepared for Regional Seminar for Consultation on the Social Dimension of Integration in Latin America and the Caribbean, Caracas, Venezuela, 16 and 17 July 2008, SP/SRC-DSIALC/DT 1-08, reprinted with permission. CONTENTS FOREWORD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7 I. INTRODUCTION 9 II. SOCIAL DIMENSION IN INTEGRATION ORGANIZATIONS 10 1. Andean Community (CAN) 10 a) Institutional mechanisms and agreements adopted 10 b) Channels for social actors’ participation 14 c) Mechanisms for citizens’ participation in the Andean Parliament 15 2. Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR) 17 a) Institutional mechanisms and agreements adopted 17 b) Channels for social actors’ participation 22 c) Mechanisms for citizens’ participation in the MERCOSUR Parliament 23 3. Caribbean Community (CARICOM) 23 a) Institutional mechanisms and agreements adopted 23 b) Channels for social actors’ participation 26 c) Mechanisms for citizens’ participation in the Caribbean Parliament 27 4. Central American Integration System (SICA) 27 a) Institutional mechanisms and agreements adopted 27 b) Channels for social actors’ participation 30 c) Mechanisms for citizens’ participation in the Central American Parliament 32 5. Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of our Americas (ALBA) 33 a) Institutional mechanisms and agreements adopted 34 b) Channels for social actors’ participation 35 c) Mechanisms for citizens’ participation in legislative bodies 35 6. Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) 35 III. GUIDELINES FOR A REGIONAL PROGRAMME ON SOCIAL DIMENSION OF INTEGRATION 38 1. Some indicators of the relative situation in LAC in the areas of health, education, housing and employment 38 -ii- 2. Experiences with projects related to the areas of health, education, housing and employment in regional integration 42 a) Health 42 b) Education 46 c) Housing 49 d) Employment 50 3. Other aspects of social dimension 53 a) Higher institutionality levels 53 b) Coordinating the external agenda with the internal agenda and regional integration 54 c) Social participation and sense of identity 55 d) Development of cross-border plans 55 e) Effects of climate change and natural disasters 56 IV. CONCLUSIONS 57 V. RECOMMENDATIONS 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY 64 FOREWORD This study is foreseen in Project I.2 of the Work Programme of the Permanent Secretariat for the year 2008, approved during the XXXIII Regular Meeting of the Latin American Council of SELA. First of all, this analytical document summarizes the main programmes, decisions and bodies related to the social dimension of integration which have been adopted or created by the various integration groups existing in Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition to the four traditional subregional integration processes, the study also takes into consideration more recent initiatives such as the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA). Special emphasis is made on the most outstanding limitations and obstacles that so far have prevented these programmes from being more effective. Secondly, the analysis focuses on specific areas (health, education, employment and housing) and other related aspects to social issues, underscoring the progress made within the regional integration schemes and considering some ideas for the guidelines to create a regional programme on social dimension. Finally, the document presents its conclusions and recommendations. This document, as drafted by the Permanent Secretariat of SELA, and its proposals will be submitted for consideration of participants in the Regional Seminar for Consultation on this issue, which will be held on 16 and 17 July 2008, with the participation of representatives of social organizations and specialized organizations with a regional scope. The Permanent Secretariat of SELA wishes to thank consultants Ariela Ruiz Caro, Socorro Ramírez and Francine Jácome, as well as other experts who were consulted, for their valuable contributions to the preparation of this study. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Subregional integration organizations in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) have created mechanisms, and adopted decisions and agreements, which are fundamentally aimed at addressing various aspects related to social development. Except for MERCOSUR, the other subregional integration organizations included, from their very foundation, specific objectives and goals in the social area. During the first half of the nineties, subregional organizations mirrored the economic reforms that were being implemented in their Member States, which were mostly influenced by the multilateral financial organizations and by the agreements adopted in the World Trade Organization (WTO). As authorities in the countries started to pay less attention to various social development areas, integration organizations began to reduce their influence on policy-making as regards issues such as labour, education, migration, social participation and public policies for income redistribution in the region – which is considered as the one with the greatest inequities in the world. Social and environmental issues were not included in the economic reforms of the nineties. At the time, authorities considered that concentrating goods and capital in those sectors prone to make investments and promote savings would improve social well-being, particularly for the poorest working sectors, by adding value to social welfare, creating jobs for those sectors and increasing their income, thus promoting social equity. (Kuznets, 1995; Robinson, 1976). But while those policies brought about macroeconomic balance and a relative modernization of some productive sectors, they also generated a high concentration of economic power as well as greater inequities in income distribution. Moreover, they limited choices as regards State economic policies and, in many cases, according to some analysts, they even weakened the legitimacy of democracy in the region. By the late-1990s, the growing dissatisfaction with the results of the reforms implemented within the framework of economic liberalization gave rise to serious questions about the viability of such reforms to improve development levels. And this paved the way for proposals which, in general terms, sought to outline long-term projects that could serve as the basis for designing State policies that should transcend governments and count on the broadest possible support of society. This was also reflected in the integration processes in LAC. The declarations stemming from the subsequent Presidential Summits of integration organizations began to grant an increasingly important role to the participation of social actors. Thus, the existing consultative bodies in the integration organizations (such as the Economic and Social Forum in MERCOSUR, the Labour and Business Consultative Councils in the Andean Community, the Consultative Committee of SICA, and the Joint Consultative Group of CARICOM) gained relevance and, to a certain extent, were taken into account in decision-making. Other important participation bodies emerged, such as We are MERCOSUR, and subregional networks of NGOs, indigenous groups, cities and municipalities were created, among other bodies. Nevertheless, the region witnessed a phenomenon similar to the one seen in the coordination mechanisms or National Agreements in force in some countries of the region, in the sense that the general guidelines established in them were not of a binding nature for defining public policies. This means, that these bodies for participation of social organizations have not had efficient coordination channels with decision-making organs in the regional integration process. Another important aspect that should be noted in analyzing the issue of social dimension of integration in LAC is that the subsidiarity principle is one of the criteria governing social policies promoted by integration organizations (particularly in the Andean Community and SICA). According to this principle, communitarian bodies must take action only to perform those tasks that can be accomplished in a more effective way than through national mechanisms. Thus, the subsidiarity principle includes those activities that can be coordinated or executed at the communitarian level in order to add substantial value to national policies, which are basically outlined and implemented within each country. Generally speaking, the progress made as regards the development of the social dimension of integration is still limited. There is not a clear definition about the objectives and the role of social issues in the integration process. Although some projects have been materialized – basically in the areas of health and education – there is not a well-defined and consistent strategy which can be considered as an essential element of the region’s development strategies. Moreover, there is a high degree of dissatisfaction among social organizations in the region – even among that that form part of official consultation bodies – with respect to their impact on the analyses and definition of development policies and regional integration. In addition, the results as regards joint social policies – for instance, social charters or their inclusion in negotiation clauses – show limited progress. And the proposals and contents of the declarations stemming from the Presidential Summits that are regularly