COVID-19 as a 'Critical juncture' - how will the world respond?

Oxfam has published a thought-provoking paper on Covid-19 as a 'critical juncture' - a moment in time when the status quo and power relations are thrown out of kilter, opening the door to previously unthinkable reforms.

The paper was drafted by Duncan Green (Senior Strategic Adviser at Oxfam GB, and Professor in Practice in International Development at the London School of Economics) and his colleagues.

ETI found some of the points relevant to our work on upholding labour rights in supply chains of particular interest:

• There’s a lot of unpredictability and uncertainty in a crisis—if you wait for things to be clear before making decisions, it’ll be too late. Adaptability is key.
• How to best use advocacy at a time like this—messaging and tone should change as the crisis changes, business as usual is neither wise nor feasible.
• Governments are as in the dark as all of us—use this time to support the response and build Political Capital rather than ‘finger wag’

Framing ‘critical junctures’

• Previous examples of a critical junction (CJ) would be WWI, WWII, the Black Death, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC) etc.
• While C-19 is indiscriminate in who it infects, it is linked to inequality—the virus will become an amplifier between countries in terms of political and economic resources. It will also create a greater differentiator between and within countries.
• Marginalised groups will be even more at risk: homeless; migrant workers being stranded; refugees; prisoner populations – ETI’s conversations with retainers and brands are echoing this concern – we’re expecting women workers and migrant workers to be disproportionately affected
• There is a counter narrative to this, that big shocks can reduce income inequality as they reduce assets of the rich. This seems unlikely to borne out in supply chains however.

What does it mean to be living through a critical juncture?

• There’s a lot of unpredictability and uncertainty—if you wait for things to be clear before making decisions, it’ll be too late
• There tend to be shifts in power, but expect to be surprised—some things will come about that fall flat, and others will emerge that are currently unimaginable – for instance:
  • The 2008 GFC resulted in the G7 becoming the G20, bringing BRICS and other countries into more powerful positions. Ultimately, G20 has been quite uninfluential though. Instead, the rise of populism, which was not apparent at all at the time, has taken hold on a large scale.

Advocacy within a Critical Juncture (CJ)

• The sequence of advocacy during a CJ is really important. Where you are within the CJ changes what tone you should be adopting
• As an advocate, there’s value in bearing witness to impact—highlight topics and issues to government that need to be prioritised.
• A lot of advocates will focus on prioritising lobby of their preferred policies (things they were already working on). Instead, we should think about the system and how it’s being affected, and second, shape what we’re lobbying for
• Think of your theory of change before your theory of practice – certainly something ETI is recting to
• Provide information to policy makers—don’t just raise the issue, but provide guidance on how they should navigate it as well (e.g.this has been done well re: the issue of Domestic Violence within C-19 advocacy)
• You have to advocate early in a crisis to shape what comes from it; you need to ‘dance with the system’. How does what you’re advocating for, fit with the stage that the crisis has gotten to.

The webinar via which this paper was presented then covered Politics, Society, and the Economy in turn. A lot more questions raised than answers given, but some interesting points nonetheless that touch on labour rights and beyond…

Politics

• What we’re seeing is a stress test of every political system in the world
• A lot of people are discussing the difference in handling the crisis between governments that are democracies and autocracies. A more interesting way of looking at it could be the difference between governments that have trust/confidence from their electorate, and those that don’t
• What will the impact on populism be? A lot of autocrats are having a crisis in their response—where they’re not believing experts/evidence, they’re losing popularity
• Is there the chance that the populism that emerged from 2008 GFC will fade now?
• Emergence of increased data and extension of surveillance which overrides data protection—will this be reversible?
• In 1956 the Suez War was the tipping point for the end of the UKs influence globally; will this be some kind of Suez for US prestige?
• How will policy debates be framed? Will we talk more about resilience of systems? And should policies have automatic stabilisers attached to them to respond to unforeseeable futures?

Society

• A lot of focus being rightly raised re: the big gendered impact of C-19—the majority on the frontline are women, often with caring responsibilities
• The response will be gendered—policy makers are finding it easier to create safety net/packages for the formal economy than informal. But the informal economy is disproportionately led by women
• Will this CJ lead to a shift in norms with regards to respect for/attention of the care economy?
• Solidarity has erupted – look at mutual aid in the UK. An earthquake in Mexico in 1985 killed 20,000; the poor response from state resulted in an amazing response from the citizenry. Over time, this morphed into longer lived social movements that over-threw the one-party State. Where will Mutual Aid movements end up?
• Possibilities for inter-generational dialogues with the young looking after old. Will there be a quid pro-quo? Will the older generation realise their beneficial situation re: housing, pensions etc. and result in a ‘new deal’ between generations?
• We’re increasingly aware of space—both personal and private, and whether we have access to space. The right to space hasn’t been a big deal in the past, but will this come into policies and advocacy in the future, e.g.: the minimum amount of space needed for a quality life? Impact on informal housing settlements etc.

Economics

• Typically, the state steps in after a crisis, with an emergency response—they take on new powers, new taxes etc. and then they rarely return exactly to normal. This is the ratchet effect of increased state power.
• C-19 will have a huge hit on lean economies—much bigger than the 2008 GFC in terms of: flight of capital and remittances from migrant workers. Debt relief and increased aid will be needed.
• There’s a huge pressure on aid budgets thought, with rich country governments likely going to find it easier to cut aid and divert to their own debts.
• On average, there is a 15 year dip in aid spending after a country faces crisis. While this wasn’t the case during the 2008 GFC, this time feels like it could be very real.
• The humanitarian response for C-19 is complicated by lack of movement—the model of usual humanitarian response is thrown into impossibility and confusion.
  • The current solution is to get cash to individuals, and local NGOs/CSOs can respond
  • This is a fantastic opportunity for CSOs and NGOs to regain some of the power from INGOs.

How should advocates respond to this situation?

• Argument that advocacy has to adjust to unfolding stages—constantly revise your messaging and approach to move with the unfolding stages of the crisis.
  • Look at system and what’s changing in the mood/politics/response and then adjust tone and content
• The government is normally the target of our advocacy, but they’re in a State of confusion, and need help. An interesting example from the Centre For Good Governance in Myanmar, who decided to help the Government rather than advocate against them. They supported with messaging, rolled it out in communities, and the Government adopted their visuals and messages as the national response. The C4GG adapted to the situation, and have political capital now for helping when the Government needed it. A far better approach in this instance than ‘finger wagging’
• Where your issues are relevant though, continue to be loud and propositional.
• Longer term issues will emerge unexpectedly and Naomi Klein’s notion of ‘disaster capitalism’ will come into play—when people take advantage of the situation for bad, e.g.abusing powers under a State of Emergency, flouting contracts etc. Advocates/campaigners need to continue to make a lot of noise on this.

The long-term picture

• After WWI, the settlements that emerged were punitive. There was no trust and this laid the basis for a further crisis.
• The WWII settlements laid the basis for new institutional order—World Bank, UN, IMF etc. They undoubtedly have their flaws, but we’d be worse off without them.
• CV-19 won’t be as big, but will we follow the WWI or WWII route?

There's a lot food for thought in the paper - do comment below on how you think the the current pandemic may alter supply chains and human rights at work in the long-term.