Recent work by geographers has highlighted attempts by local groups to ‘jump scales’ in their efforts to contest the power of global capital. Sometimes such ‘scale jumping’ is also seen as part of an effort to bypass the nation-state. This paper explores a particular case of scale jumping, which illustrates some of the complexities of the process. Building on the anticorporate globalization momentum generated during the ‘battle in Seattle’ and the demonstrations during the February 2000 United Nations Commission on Trade and Development meetings in Bangkok, local antidam activists from Ubon Ratchathani province in Thailand scaled up their activities during 2000, utilizing various international connections to improve their visibility and strengthen their prospects for success. Rather than simply bypassing the nation-state, however, they have had to use both local and international resources to try to combat the policies of the nation-state, a project in which they have had real but still contested success. The case of antidam activism in Ubon Ratchathani illustrates some of the nuances of ‘globalization from below’, as well as the continuing power and relevance of the nation-state as a site of struggle.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlthusserL, 1969For Marx (Verso, London)
2.
AndersonB, 1977, “Withdrawal symptoms: Social and cultural aspects of the October 6 Coup”Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars913–30
3.
AndersonB, 1990, “Murder and progress in modern Siam”New Left Reviewnumber 181, 33–48
4.
AndersonB, 1991Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (Verso, London)
5.
LaothamatasAnek, 1992Business Associations and the New Political Economy of Thailand: From Bureaucratic Polity to Liberal Corporatism (Westview Press, Boulder, CO)
6.
BakerC, 2000, “Thailand's assembly of the poor: Background, drama, reaction”South East Asia Research85–29
7.
BelloW, 1999, “The iron cage: The WTO, the Bretton Woods Institutions, and the South”Focus on Tradenumber 41, see the Focus on the Global South website http://www.focusweb.org
8.
BelloWCunninghamSPohL K, 1998A Siamese Tragedy: Development and Disintegration in Modern Thailand (Zed Books, London)
9.
BowieK, 1997Rituals of National Loyalty: An Anthropology of the State and the Village Scout Movement in Thailand (Columbia University Press, New York)
10.
BrecherJCostelloTSmithB, 2000Globalization from Below: The Power of Solidarity (South End Press, Cambridge, MA)
11.
Chai-AnanS, 1995, “Economic development and democracy”, in Thailand's Industrialization and Its Consequences Ed. KrongkaewMedhi (Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants), pp 235–250
12.
ChayanV, 2000, “Comment on World Bank Response to WCD Report, Social Aspect”, unpublished manuscript, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand
13.
CockburnASt ClairJSekulaA, 20005 Days That Shook the World: Seattle and Beyond (Verso, London)
14.
CoxR, 1987Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History (Columbia University Press, New York)
15.
DanaherKBurbachR, 2000Globalize This! The Battle Against the World Trade Organization and Corporate Rule (Common Courage Press, Monroe, ME)
16.
DickenP, 1997, “Transnational corporations and nation-states”International Social Science Journal15177–99
17.
EpsteinB, 2001, “Anarchism and the anti-globalization movement”Monthly Review53 (4) 1–14
18.
FriedmanT, 2000The Lexus and the Olive Tree (Farrar, Strauss, Giroux, New York)
19.
GirlingJ, 1981Thailand: Society and Politics (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY)
20.
GlassmanJ, 1999, “State power beyond the ‘territorial trap’: The internationalization of the state”Political Geography18669–696
21.
GlassmanJCarmodyP, 2001, “Structural adjustment in East and Southeast Asia: Lessons from Latin America”Geoforum3177–90
22.
HardtMNegriA, 2000Empire (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
23.
HewisonK, 1993, “Nongovernmental organizations and the cultural development perspective in Thailand: A comment on Rigg (1991)”World Development211699–1708
24.
HewisonK, 1997Political Change in Thailand: Democracy and Participation (Routledge, London)
25.
HewisonK, 1999, “Localism in Thailand: A study of globalisation and its discontents”, WP, Center for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, University of Warwick, Coventry
26.
HewisonK, 2000, “Thailand's capitalism before and after the economic crisis”, in Politics and Markets in the Wake of the Asian Crisis Eds RobisonRBeesonMJayasuriyaKKimH-R (Routledge, London) pp 192–211
27.
HewisonKBrownA, 1994, “Labour and unions in an industrialising Thailand”Journal of Contemporary Asia24483–514
28.
HewisonKRodanG, 1994, “Whatever happened to the Revolution? The decline of the Left in Southeast Asia”, in Socialist Register 1994 Eds MilibandRPanitchL (Merlin Press, London) pp 235–262
29.
HirstPThompsonG, 1999Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance (Polity Press, Cambridge)
30.
JensonJPapillonM, 2000, “Challenging the citizenship regime: The James Bay Cree and transnational action”Politics and Society28245–264
31.
UngpakornJi, 1997The Struggle for Democracy and Social Justice in Thailand (Arom Pongpangan Foundation, Bangkok)
32.
TejapiraKasian, 2001, “Post-crisis economic impasse and political recovery in Thailand: The resurgence of economic nationalism”, paper presented at the Southeast Asian Studies Summer Institute (SEASSI), 23 June
33.
KeyesC, 1989Thailand: Buddhist Kingdom as Modern Nation-state (Westview Press, Boulder, CO)
34.
KitchingG, 1982Development and Underdevelopment in Historical Perspective: Populism, Nationalism, and Industrialism (Methuen, New York)
35.
KortenD, 1990Getting to the 21st Century: Voluntary Action and the Global Agenda (Kumarian Press, West Hartford, CT)
36.
KrugmanP, 2000a, “One in the eye with an American pie”Bangkok Post 17 February
37.
KrugmanP, 2000b, “When workers help themselves”Bangkok Post 23 May
38.
MarkusenA, 1996, “Sticky places in slippery space: A typology of industrial districts”Economic Geography72293–313
39.
MartinezE, 2000, “Where was the color in Seattle?”, in Globalize This! The Battle Against the World Trade Organization and Corporate Rule Eds DanaherKBurbachR (Common Courage Press, Monroe, ME) pp 74–81
40.
MarxK, 1977Capital, Volume I (Vintage Books, New York)
41.
KrongkaewMedhi, 1996, “Thailand: Poverty assessment update”, Economic Research and Training Center, Faculty of Economics, Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand
42.
MitchellD, 1998, “The scales of justice: Localist ideology, large-scale production, and agricultural labor's geography of resistance in 1930s California”, in Organizing the Landscape: Geographical Perspectives on Labor Unionism Ed. HerodA (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN), pp 159–94
43.
OhmaeK, 1995The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies (Free Press, New York)
44.
PanitchL, 1994, “Globalisation and the State”, in Socialist Register 1994 Eds MilibandRPanitchL (Merlin Press, London) pp 60–93
45.
PhongpaichitPasukBakerC, 1995Thailand: Economy and Politics (Oxford University Press, Kuala Lampur)
46.
PhongpaichitPasukBakerC, 1998Thailand's Boom and Bust (Silkworm Books, Chiang Mai, Thailand)
47.
PhongpaichitPasukBakerC, 2000Thailand's Crisis (Silkworm Books, Chiang Mai, Thailand)
48.
PorterPSheppardE, 1998A World of Difference: Society Nature, Development (Guilford Press, New York)
49.
RiggJ, 1991, “Grass-roots development in rural Thailand: A lost cause?”World Development19199–211
50.
RiggJ, 1993, “A reply to Kevin Hewison”World Development211709–1714
51.
RoutledgeP, 1998, “Going globile: Spatiality, embodiment, and mediation in the Zapatista insurgency”, in Rethinking Geopolitics Eds TuathailG ÓDalbyS (Routledge, London) pp 240–260
52.
ChalermsripinyoratRungrawee, 2001, “The politics of representation: The assembly of the poor and the use of media space to challenge the hegemonic discourse in Thailand”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, Chicago, March
53.
RupertM, 2000Ideologies of Globalization: Contending Visions of a New World Order (Routledge, London)
54.
SmithJ, 2000, “The China Syndrome-or how to hijack a movement”LA Labor Newshttp://www.LAlabor.org
55.
SmithN, 1993, “Homeless/global: Scaling places”, in Mapping the Futures-Local Cultures, Global Change Eds BirdJCurtisBPutnamTRobertsonGTicknerL (Routledge, London) pp 87–119
56.
SmithN, 2000, “Global Seattle”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space181–5
57.
SneddonC, 2000, Altered Rivers: Socio-ecological Transformations, Water Conflicts and the State in Northeast Thailand PhD thesis, Department of Geography, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
58.
ViengchanSompong, 2000Voice of the River: One Thai Villager's Story of the Pak Mun Dam (Community History Series, Khon Kaen, Thailand)
59.
StreckfussD (Ed.), 1996Modern Thai Monarchy and Cultural Politics: The Acquittal of Sulak Sivaraksa on the Charge of Lèse-majesté in Siam, 1995 and its Consequences (Santi Pracha Dhamma Institute, Bangkok)
60.
StreckfussD, 1998The Poetics of Subversion: Civil Liberty and Lèse-majesté in the Modern Thai State PhD thesis, Department of History, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
61.
MaisrikrodSurin, 1997, “The making of Thai democracy: A study of political alliances among the State, the capitalists, and the middle class”, in Democratization in East and Southeast Asia Ed. AnekL (Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore) pp 141–166
62.
PrasartsetSuthy, 1991Democratic Alternatives to Maldevelopment: The Case of Thailand [PRIME (International Peace Research Institute Meigaku), Totsuka, Yokohama, Japan]
63.
SwyngedouwE, 1997, “Neither global nor local: ‘glocalization’ and the politics of scale”, in Spaces of Globalization: Reasserting the Power of the Local Ed. CoxK, (Guilford Press, London) pp 137–66
64.
The Economist1999, “The real losers”, December 9, editorial
65.
TurtonA, 1978, “The current situation in the Thai countryside”Journal of Contemporary Asia8104–142
66.
TurtonA, 1989a, “Local powers and rural differentiation”, in Agrarian Transformations: Local Processes and the State in Southeast Asia Eds HartGTurtonAWhiteB (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA) pp 70–97
67.
TurtonA, 1989b, “Thailand: Agrarian bases of State power”, in Agrarian Transformations: Local Processes and the State in Southeast Asia Eds HartGTurtonAWhiteB (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA) pp 53–69
68.
WadeR, 1996, “Globalization and its limits: Reports of the death of the national economy are greatly exaggerated”, in National Diversity and Global Capitalism Eds BergerSDoreR (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY) pp 60–88
69.
WainwrightJPrudhamSGlassmanJ, 2000, “The battles in Seattle: Microgeographies of resistance and the challenge of building alternative futures”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space185–13
70.
WebberMRigbyD1996The Golden Age Illusion: Rethinking Postwar Capitalism (Guilford Press, New York)
71.
WeissL, 1998The Myth of the Powerless State: Governing the Economy in a Global Era (Polity Press, Cambridge)
72.
World Bank, 2000, “WCD case study, the Pak Mun Dam in Mekong River Basin, Thailand”, World Bank, Washington, DC
73.
World Commission on Dams, 2000Pak Mun Case Study: Final Draft Report internet version available at WCD website, http://www.dams.org/
74.
World Commission on Dams, 2001Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-making (Earthscan, London)
