the legacy of the baby boomers or the the legacy of the ... · pdf fileare the baby boomers to...

The Legacy of the Baby Boomers or the French Social System

?M

arie-Claire Patron

The Legacy of the Baby Boomers or the French Social System?Issues of Equality and Brain Drain

Marie-Claire Patron

B O L D V I S I O N S I N E D U C A T I O N A L R E S E A R C H

S e n s e P u b l i s h e r s B V E R 3 6

Spine11.481 mm

B O L D V I S I O N S I N E D U C A T I O N A L R E S E A R C H

ISBN 978-94-6209-069-9

Biography

The Legacy of the Baby Boomers or the French Social System?

Issues of Equality and Brain Drain

Marie-Claire PatronBond University, Australia

This book aims to identify key factors influencing the increasing brain drain of French early and mid-career graduates primarily to Anglo-Saxon countries in order to avoid the inexorable outcome of their tertiary studies: precarious employment conditions relegating them to the status of intellectual underclass in France. This qualitative ethnographic study investigated the experiences of 38 French nationals and expatriates aged between 21 and 48 to provide a voice to the increasing number of students and graduates who despair at the thought of witnessing their years of study culminate in a perennial cycle of training, unemployment, internship. What distinguishes the French from their European counterparts who also struggle to secure employment and a decent future? These unprecedented circumstances in Europe are as a result of the global financial crisis and the current sovereign debt dilemma. Who is responsible for the quandary in which French graduates find themselves in the stratified French society of today, where globalisation has made academic mobility de rigueur? France risks losing her talented Generation X to more accepting countries where a spirit of meritocracy exists and economic rewards are awarded after years of tertiary education and assiduousness. A large number of constituents belonging to the Baby Boomer Generation are ensconced in comfortable government positions or are established in lucrative careers reserved for the upper echelons of the privileged classes. Are the Baby Boomers to blame for the predicament of Generation X, for failing to transmit intergenerational equality to subsequent generations? Will the new government deliver on the promises to grant France’s youth the economic rewards they deserve, and the respect and equality that the previous generation have taken for granted?

Marie-Claire Patron has a background in education through teaching French and Spanish in Australia, France and Spain. During her eight years in Spain, she had industrial experience in business, law, banking and the building industry, using extensively her skills in Interpreting and Translation. Marie-Claire is an Assistant Professor in language teaching and her research focuses on the intercultural field and the internationalisation of students. She has been at Bond University, Australia for 21 years, 18 as Head of French and Spanish Language. This is Marie-Claire’s third book.

The Legacy of the Baby Boomers or the French Social System?

BOLD VISIONS IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Volume 36 Series Editors: Kenneth Tobin, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, USA Joe Kincheloe, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Editorial Board: Heinz Sunker, Universität Wuppertal, Germany Peter McLaren, University of California at Los Angeles, USA Kiwan Sung, Woosong University, South Korea Angela Calabrese Barton, Teachers College, New York, USA Margery Osborne, Centre for Research on Pedagogy and Practice Nanyang Technical University, Singapore W.-M. Roth, University of Victoria, Canada Scope: Bold Visions in Educational Research is international in scope and includes books from two areas: teaching and learning to teach and research methods in education. Each area contains multi-authored handbooks of approximately 200,000 words and monographs (authored and edited collections) of approximately 130,000 words. All books are scholarly, written to engage specified readers and catalyze changes in policies and practices. Defining characteristics of books in the series are their explicit uses of theory and associated methodologies to address important problems. We invite books from across a theoretical and methodological spectrum from scholars employing quantitative, statistical, experimental, ethnographic, semiotic, hermeneutic, historical, ethnomethodological, phenomenological, case studies, action, cultural studies, content analysis, rhetorical, deconstructive, critical, literary, aesthetic and other research methods. Books on teaching and learning to teach focus on any of the curriculum areas (e.g., literacy, science, mathematics, social science), in and out of school settings, and points along the age continuum (pre K to adult). The purpose of books on research methods in education is not to present generalized and abstract procedures but to show how research is undertaken, highlighting the particulars that pertain to a study. Each book brings to the foreground those details that must be considered at every step on the way to doing a good study. The goal is not to show how generalizable methods are but to present rich descriptions to show how research is enacted. The books focus on methodology, within a context of substantive results so that methods, theory, and the processes leading to empirical analyses and outcomes are juxtaposed. In this way method is not reified, but is explored within well-described contexts and the emergent research outcomes. Three illustrative examples of books are those that allow proponents of particular perspectives to interact and debate, comprehensive handbooks where leading scholars explore particular genres of inquiry in detail, and introductory texts to particular educational research methods/issues of interest to novice researchers.

The LFrenc

Issues o

Marie-CBond Un

Legacy of tch Social S

of Equality an

Claire Patron niversity, Austr

the Baby BSystem?

nd Brain Drai

ralia

Boomers o

in

or the

A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN: 978-94-6209-069-9 (paperback) ISBN: 978-94-6209-070-5 (hardback) ISBN: 978-94-6209-071-2 (e-book)

Published by: Sense Publishers, P.O. Box 21858, 3001 AW Rotterdam, The Netherlands https://www.sensepublishers.com/

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved © 2012 Sense Publishers

No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

DEDICATION

For my daughters, Dominique and Danièle Juriansz

vii

CONTENTS

Note on Transcription and Translation ix

Acknowledgements xi

Chapter 1: Introduction and Overview 1 Background: The Context of the Study 1 Methodology 15 Chapter Summary 17

Chapter 2: Globalisation, Mobility and the Young Educated Sector 21 Academic Mobility 29 Brain Drain 36 The Globalisation Debate 43 The French and the Internet 57

Chapter 3: French Education and the Development of Cultural Capital and Intercultural Competence 61 The French Educational System 61 Bourdieu’s Theories on Cultural Capital and the French

Educational System 74 Bourdieu’s Theories of Social Stratification 82

Chapter 4: Factors Provoking French Brain Drain 91 Social Issues in France – The French Social System 91 Youth Unemployment, Integration Issues and Economic Rewards 100 The Legacy of the Baby Boomers 109

Louis Chauvel’s research on Intergenerational Inequalities 109

Chapter 5: The Personal Experiences of Young Educated French Individuals and Mid-Career Graduates: The Value of Cultural and Intercultural Capital in France 125 Meritocracy and Economic Rewards 132

Chapter 6: The Value of French Cultural and Intercultural Capital Abroad: The Development of Linguistic and Intercutural Competence 151 French identity, an Asset or Handicap? 164 L’Exception Culturelle Française and The Perceived Value of being

French Abroad 169

Chapter 7: The Immediate and Future Consequences for France: Implications of Findings 173 Conclusion 181

CHAPTER 1

References 191

Appendix 1: Table of Participants of this Inquiry 197

Index 199

ix

NOTE ON TRANSCRIPTION AND TRANSLATION

The quotations in this book, derived from the interviews of the French participants in my inquiry have been transcribed verbatim and all incidences of vernacular and incorrect speech and orthography have been reproduced faithfully both in French and English.

xi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express my gratitude to Associate Professor Anthony Liddicoat, a brilliant scholar from the University of South Australia, for his selfless attitude toward those who seek his assistance and his advice. In spite of a demanding schedule, he found the time to review my book prior to its publication. I am grateful to my research assistants, Marian Pond and Lauren Hertel for their efforts in categorising the voluminous research involved with a project of this size. My sincere thanks go to Michel Lokhorst of Sense Publishing and the Series Editor, Professor Kenneth Tobin for their professionalism and their meticulous attention to detail pertaining to the editing, style, design and production of this book. Desha Lourens, heading the production team has also done an amazing job. My special thanks to my friend and colleague, Frédérique Leymonie for her invaluable advice on intercultural issues discussed in this book. I am indebted to my colleagues and friends Dr Jacqueline Macleod and Mr Denis Etournaud for their inestimable contribution to the discussions on diverse fields of research that underpin my inquiry. Thank you to my partner, Robert Ross who endured both my presence and my absence in Italy as I completed this book and for his support, patience and proof-reading of the manuscript. Last but not least, my sincere thanks to the participants of this inquiry for their candid testimonials on polemic issues that were sometimes difficult to discuss and without whom this book would not have seen the light of day.

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

BACKGROUND: THE CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

Chollet’s (2006) thought-provoking quotation from an article in Le Monde Diplomatique, on the plight of French graduates aptly sets the scene in this book that investigates the precarious living and employment conditions, and bleak future in which Generation X finds itself today.

I’m from the intellectual underclass. One of those who fry their brains, read megabytes of books, magazines, web pages, political pamphlets and petitions, and never get anything out of it. I’m like an engine guzzling fuel just to stay in overdrive, burning up mental energy for nothing. (Chollet, 2006. Sévérine, p. 1).

In the midst of profound uncertainties in France the socio-economic situation has become untenable for the young generation. Who can be held responsible for the crisis depicted above? How can the downward social mobility of the young generations be reconciled? What are the factors that are corroding the objective model of a society of middle classes, lacking accumulation of wealth, homogeneity, and foresight? (Chauvel, 2006a). According to Louis Chauvel, the interruption of the model of social upward mobility from generation to generation is the pivotal point of the crisis of the middle classes, from which many are excluded. Can one point the finger of blame on any one sector of French society, on isolated issues such as:

• economic stagnation, uncertainties and unpredictability of the future? • France’s social model, incorporating their renowned welfare regime? – the

social protection scheme, La Sécurité Sociale founded in 1945 and fondly referred to as La Sécu that provides multiple benefits, a generous retirement package, unemployment insurance etc. based on public solidarity between generations.

• increasing intergenerational inequalities that have provoked ever-widening socio-economic gaps between the Baby Boomer generation and Generation X?

• the inflexibility of the labour market in the face of globalisation?

Could the escalating social and economic problems in France instead emanate from the policies and practices of past and current French government administrations that have

• perpetuated an elitist education model where educational meritocracy and valorisation of credentials have lost their meaning?

CHAPTER 1

2

• curtailed employment opportunities as a result of an inflexible labour market? • adopted globalisation by stealth? • promulgated disastrous fiscal policies? • and ignored urgent social issues?

Is it possible on the other hand that a combination of these factors has contributed to the lamentable state of affairs for the educated sector in France? Substantiated by quantitative research, these are the issues that I discuss in this book from the perspective of my small qualitative ethnographic study on the plight of university students, early and mid-career graduates who have expatriated or are currently contemplating a move to predominantly Anglo-Saxon countries. This dramatic response to the troubling economic and social crises in France is preferable in lieu of suffering the consequences of injustices as the French witness the disappearance of the middle classes or its re-definition, along with all the privileges that come with social stratification systems. This disquieting trend among the increasingly highly-qualified young French educated sector is graphically epitomised by the case of Sévérine, one of the subjects of Chollet’s (2006) inquiry, introduced in the opening quotation, who describes her life in France in her blog. Séverine depicts an insecure working life that has ‘bounced between internships, welfare benefits, temping and unemployment’. Her case is but one of myriad anecdotal examples that I have sourced online, numerous blogs and YouTube interviews that complement my qualitative inquiry into the issues affecting Generation Xers in France. This is a worrying state of affairs in anyone’s language, as the scenario translates into an exodus of talented individuals who have a great deal to contribute to their nation. Increasingly, this new phenomenon of the French Diaspora abroad, a sociological term employed to explain the alleged outflow of gifted individuals from their country of origin, is becoming reality (Dobson, Birrell, Rapson, & Smith, 2005). The French have traditionally been known as timid travellers, reluctant to expatriate to foreign shores for work or even extended holidays because of their lack of proficiency in foreign languages (Patron, 2007, 2009). This trend began to change at the turn of the century and it has now become de rigueur for French youth in particular to spend time abroad in countries they had never contemplated visiting previously. The inflexibility of job contract laws was already signaled as the blame for high unemployment provoking the brain drain of educated young people in 2006, even whilst some sociologists preferred a more optimistic outlook (See also Rohan, 2006). These exiles have been dubbed the Eurostar Generation by Campbell, (2007) who depicts an increasing number of young French professionals who owe the dramatic changes in their lives to the services of the Eurostar. With their one-way ticket in hand, they are heading to lands of opportunity, to London, Dublin, New York and other cities abroad where immigration protocols are less onerous (Campbell, 2007). Chantal, a French expatriate professor in Australia who is a participant in my inquiry adds: ‘There are increasing numbers of French graduates heading to Wall St, setting themselves up


3

as entrepreneurs in a short period of time. It’s no wonder they’re leaving France.’ (Chantal, July, 2010). In 2011, from the perspective of this Eurostar generation, insufficient progress has been made to improve the economic and social situation that could stem this outward flow of talent as the issue worsens by the day. The reality is that French brain drain can no longer be dismissed by ministers and various other organisations as fictitious because this phenomenon has affected France for a least a decade. In 2000, Jean François-Poncet, president of the Commission for Economic Affairs suggested that opponents of the notion of brain drain were inclined to treat the issue with banality, minimising the effects of the phenomenon and rejecting the idea that the expatriation of highly-qualified graduates (from the schools of Engineering, IT and Business, the Sciences, the grandes écoles, and executives and entrepreneurs in new information technologies in particular) had no impact on the macro-economics of a nation (François-Poncet, 2000). How frustrating to acknowledge that after years of a costly education financed by the French public and the State, that a foreign country should benefit from their expertise, creating riches for both the individual and the host nation. This is quite an indictment for France and perhaps a metaphorical slap on the face of the French that the young generation is choosing Anglo-Saxon nations over their homeland. This phenomenon undeniably signifies brain gain for the receiving countries but sadly France is the loser; notwithstanding incoming foreign graduates balance the equation to some extent. The exile of French graduates signifies appreciation for the talents of these young people in contrast with their own country where they perceive that their cultural and intercultural capital is not valued by French companies. In a Le Point article in 2008, co-author of a provocative article entitled: Baby-Boomers: Le Casse du Siècle, (Baby Boomers: The Heist of the Century), Melanie Delattre includes the testimonial of twenty-six year old Julien Burbach who chose to settle in Ireland after his Masters degree in Commercial Negotiations, qualified as a baccalauréat+51 (‘bac+’ thereafter) years of tertiary studies. The following quotation is but the tip of the iceberg when one considers how French education is perceived abroad and within France itself. Burbach suggests:

En France, être jeune est un handicap ... Démarrer en France, c’est dur. Il n’y a pas de place pour les jeunes … [Ses griefs à l’égard de son pays natal – la dette et sa conséquence]. Cela décourge les nouveaux entrants sur le marché du travail [en France]. En Irelande, je gagne 25% net de plus qu’en France … [La première raison de son exil reste] le manque de perspectives d’évolution de carrière rapide quand on est jeune. Les vieux nous appuient sur la tête … [A Dublin] être jeune est un atout. En France, c’est un handicap. (Gernelle, Delattre, & Levy, 2008 p. 5). In France, being young is a handicap … starting out in France is hard. There’s no place for the young. [His grievance – the national debt and its consequences]. This discourages integration of new entrants into the labour market [in France]. In Ireland, I earn 25% net more than in France. [The first reason for this exile concerns] the lack of

CHAPTER 1

4

prospects for rapid promotion up the corporate ladder for young people. The older generation is weighing down on us. [In Dublin] being young is an asset. In France, it’s a handicap.

Whilst Burbach acknowledges the sacrifices that his parents made to support him during his studies and job search, he argues: Les soixante-huitards nous assistent plutôt que de nous laisser prendre nos responsabilités. (The sixty-eight-year-olds, or Generation ‘68 prefer to help us [financially] rather than allow us to assume our responsibilities.) (Gernelle, et al., 2008. Ibid.). As France struggles with questions of identity, particularly in light of the huge influx of immigration from North Africa and its position in the European Union, if the nation’s brightest are leaving this is bound to be cause for concern in many sectors of society. Could this predicament help explain France’s snail-paced access to the world of the Internet and global communications, particularly during the feverish years of information technology development where French start-up companies re-located to the Silicon Valley in the US? In the 2000 report, François-Poncet revealed that 1.8 million French individuals had settled outside of France. This number might seem inconsequential in light of France’s population of sixty-three million plus inhabitants except for the fact that this increasing exodus has been depriving France of an entrepreneurial elite group with an economic and strategic role to play. He warned that ‘a hemorrhage, even numerically insignificant, would have within the medium term, very serious consequences’ (François-Poncet, 2000 p. 2). The commission’s report stipulated that France would only retain its elite expatriates and would only attract others of their ilk from other countries if France overcame her ideological obstructions and implemented policies and practices backing innovation, the youth and consequently the future. If ‘France is still indisputably one of the richest and most economically successful countries in the world ... [with] a GDP of $2.2 trillion [in 2007] ... in the same league as Japan and Germany’ (Gurfinkiel, 2007), why are the French facing profound uncertainties not witnessed since the establishment of the 5th Republic by President Charles de Gaulle in 1958? The stakes are high as France faces a bleak future, and not only as a result of the Global Financial Crisis (‘GFC’ thereafter) or the threat of a possible second wave of economic downturn in 2010. Is France at risk of morphing into a mere shadow of the country that was once one of the advanced economies and democracies of Europe? The French are evidently not alone in facing such difficult circumstances as other European economies share similar characteristics, particularly Greece and the Latin Rim countries, Italy, Belgium, Portugal and Spain that have similar conservative corporatist welfare regimes (Chauvel, 2008). The United Kingdom and European nations such as Ireland, Poland and Germany to name but a few, are poised to experience similar structural problems such as an ageing population, escalating immigration, public debt along with other social and political issues that may fuel the brain drain of young prodigious graduates (generally middle class professionals aged between twenty – forty) toward the US in particular. The situation of brain drain is a prickly issue as the perception of social scientists, social actors such as politicians, and the media on this concept is largely


5

contingent on current rhetoric when it concerns the nation’s youngest and brightest leaving their homeland. In this age of globalisation it would indeed be remiss of any government or institution if they did not promote academic mobility especially for the youth of the nation state, as the economic benefits of the foreign experience for their country are enormous, that is if they return and are willing to stay. A tenuous balance exists between the retention of a nation’s talent and the brain drain of its finest graduates. Those graduates who have emigrated can represent an important asset for governments if they support and mobilise them efficiently by engaging with their overseas Diaspora in a coherent and strategic way (Russell, 2010). On the other hand, expatriates can represent an additional burden, on top of the brain drain of human and cultural capital on the French government as access to their beloved Sécu, the generous Social Security welfare system or L’Insécurité Sociale as it is becoming known today, continues to be available to its citizens whilst abroad through the Caisse des Français de L’Etranger (CFE), the foreign equivalent. This French system of protection is exorbitant and the deficit in the Social Security System has been increasing dramatically since the 1980s. Various measures have been envisaged to slow the relentless pace of these debts but they have proved extremely unpopular and have not been implemented successfully. In her interview, Chantal was scathing in her comments about those who have the gall (pun intended) to milk the French social security system whilst they denigrate their adoptive country.

The problem is that some expatriates are obviously lucid, some of them are uncivil minded. You know the blogs, the reactions from people. Marc in New York will comment on French issues in Le Monde about French or American debates, for example, about the elections when there was a lot of commentary about Obama’s attempt to reform the American health system ... a lot of them were very lucid to say that there’s still something to value in the French model whilst saying: ‘I do not like that I am here, I have to work here but I don’t want to be here.’ They make a lot of money in Wall Street, in London but they remain French. They only go back to France when they want health care or their retirement! I also read comments from some of those French guys working in Wall Street that had been Americanised …well they are very ignorant of the fact that if they end up being in Wall Street and are able to make millions it’s because the mathematical skills they acquired, they acquired because they went through the education system and they didn’t have to pay for it ... there are other people who say that cheating is nice. They are there because we supported them … (Chantal, July, 2010).

Chantal disapproves of those who take advantage of the scheme when they need medical treatment because they believe that the health system in their host country is inadequate and less efficient. After all, once a French national, always a French national and they are entitled to benefit from the generous social assistance even whilst abroad. Chantal is evidently one who believes that if they criticise France for her shortcomings they should not be receiving any assistance from their homeland. They need to show some gratitude instead.

CHAPTER 1

6

My focus in this book is essentially on the French circumstances, as the substantive areas of research that are needed to inform the discussions in this book are voluminous. The scene is set to gain momentum as the potential leaders of France, who should, under normal circumstances, consist of a young dynamic workforce, are actually made up of thousands of disgruntled graduates aged between twenty – forty. This group faces pressing social issues including intergenerational inequalities, a disintegrating social class system, precarious employment, highly regressive taxes and integration problems. Whilst graduates from the grandes écoles today still enjoy the status of Enarques – revered graduates or mentors and guardians of the nation (Gurfinkiel, 2007), the predicament of statist university graduates paints a vastly different picture.2 The Ecole Nationale d’Administration – ENA is recognised as the epitome of meritocracy and is one of the 60 prestigious ‘leadership schools’ set up in 1945 when Charles de Gaulle presided over the provisional French Republic Government (Pierre Bourdieu, 1977). Statist university graduates have to endure a merry-go-round of internships, training and temporary contracts perennially resulting in few genuine opportunities for a lasting and meaningful career in their field (Gurfinkiel, 2007). Who is being primed to take over the reins of this country if France’s brightest continue to leave? Time is clearly of the essence for significant change to intensify. As the GFC worsened in Europe in 2009 and sovereign debt also became an issue, the European Union was forced to bail out Greece, Portugal, Spain and Ireland. In 2011, Italy is now under the European Union’s microscope. Is France, whose economic growth, steady at the turn of the century, is currently struggling to maintain stability, likely to follow in the same path as her neighbours? What harsh measures will then have to be implemented to bring France back onto a stronger economic path? The OECD Employment Outlook in 2009 forecast a dismal future for France as unemployment was expected to rise to 11% by the end of 2010 if recovery failed to gain momentum. The recovery was in fact declared to be underway in their 2010 report with an unemployment rate of 9.7% recorded in the first quarter of 2010. Real GDP growth was projected to continue into 2011 at the rate of 2%, led by investment growth, exports and an end to destocking (OECD, 2009a). This in fact did not eventuate as France plunged to 0% growth in August 2011 and into negative growth in September. In spite of the OECD outlook the youth unemployment rate reached new heights in 2009, a situation that did not augur well for the jobs crisis. In 2011, OECD data indicate unemployment rates at 9.5% in May, 2011 with recent statistics revealing 9.8% in October of 2011. Nicolas Sarkozy is a champion of globalisation in France, is pro-America and keen to reverse anti-American sentiment in his country, no mean feat certainly. Further, he is intent on improving the status of foreign language acquisition in the process, particularly English. A little contradictory it would appear, in light of a speech the president made at the fortieth anniversary of the International Organisation of Francophonie, where he complained of the ‘snobisme’ of French diplomats who are ‘happy to speak English’ rather than French, which is ‘under siege’ (Kimmelman, 2010 p. 1). In the Francophone forum celebrating French worldwide, Nicolas Sarkozy argued that defending French language and the values


7

it represented was a battle for cultural diversity in the world. Securing the votes of conservative French voters in the process, he argued the problem was not English per se but ‘ready-to-wear culture, uniformity, monolingualism’ effectively referring to English. As globalisation becomes firmly entrenched, language is an obvious tool used to differentiate between cultures as pressure is exerted on other than Anglo-Saxon countries to reaffirm their cultural heritage (Kimmelman, 2010. Ibid.). In 2008, the Minister of Education Xavier Darcos ‘promised that all pupils would go out of compulsory school bilingual!’ (Joffre, 2008). A tall order, given the dissatisfaction that has reigned supreme among language students over the past decades with regard to foreign language pedagogy in France. It cannot be denied however, that with the increasing mobility of young French nationals toward Anglo-Saxon countries in particular, and in light of the invasiveness and speed of the Internet finally becoming their most significant tool, the acquisition of English added to their linguistic repertoire is finally being recognised and lauded, by some members of society at least. That is, for those who return home and actually stay! As far as L’Académie Française, the custodians of French language and culture are concerned, and the country’s elite that have tried to maintain the integrity of French language, the adoption of English is seen as detrimental to French culture. Although, in light of the supremacy of English globally, it appears that the Academy has abandoned the fight to preserve the integrity of French language, by actually promoting multilingualism (Leonard, 2007). ‘Abandoned’ is a little extreme one could think, considering the prestigious position of this organisation and the mantra of protection that members endorse for French language and culture. A thirty-eight year old academic whose testimonies have contributed significantly to this study is Danielle, one of the French national participants of this study. She explains: ‘The nickname for the Academy members is Les Immortels (The Immortals), symbolised by the seal they receive when being intronised (inducted) because of its encryption: A l’immortalité (For eternity)’ (Danielle, April, 2008). She clarifies this does not refer to the members but to the language and its duration throughout the ages. In 2007, prior to the national elections, Nicolas Sarkozy travelled to London to implore the French exiles, composed of an estimated 300,000 French expatriates, to return home, bringing with them their talents, their passion, their imagination and intelligence. He promised significant reforms to fiscal policies and to the overzealous bureaucratic system, particularly where employment legislation is concerned. He vowed to free up the inflexible labour market and to promote hard work, longer working hours for those interested, espousing a spirit of meritocracy and free enterprise (Chrisafis, 2007). What of the social and political changes needed to address the intergenerational inequalities between the Baby Boomers and the X generation of highly-qualified graduates and graduating students who have been denied the same privileges that their parents enjoyed in the workforce and socially? In spite of being more qualified than their elders, as tertiary education is relatively inexpensive in France, ostensibly a cheaper option than employing the graduates, the latter group are unlikely to climb the social ladder, can barely expect to be gainfully employed in their area of expertise, and owning

CHAPTER 1

8

their own homes has become unachievable. As limited career opportunities are becoming a perpetual concern for this generation who must face challenges dramatically more distressing than the previous generation had to endure, expatriating is becoming far more appealing than fighting for a right to work, live decently and enjoy the benefits that many Baby Boomers take for granted. And what of the bête noire of French entrepreneurs, the draconian level of taxes imposed on stock options? These stock options are sometimes offered to upper level management staff in companies as an extra incentive on top of their salary, their willingness to join the company often contingent on lucrative deals (Edmondson, 1998). Even if the laws governing this complex issue were modified in 2010, there are implications for the way the Incentive Stock Options (ISO) and the Nonqualified Stock Options are managed. The issue is far from being resolved satisfactorily. In light of the difficulty in obtaining accurate data on the French exiles, only 4.2% of tertiary educated French individuals were registered in the (OECD, 2008) report of the Profile of Immigrant Populations in the 21st century as emigrating from France. Other sources indicate that 2.5 million French people are living abroad whilst the official figure appears to be between 1.4 and 1.5 million. One can only speculate as to more accurate figures in 2010 and 2011 as a result of the GFC and the difficulties in establishing statistics. At grass roots level on the other hand, through my qualitative research with French nationals and expatriates and from the innumerable blog entries depicting this phenomenon on the Internet, the exact number of expatriates is far from simple to determine. Internet blogs testifying to a better and richer life abroad for the French are commonplace but it seems the French do not spend much time in setting up these sites, even though many credible examples highlight the successes of entrepreneurs in particular. YouTube interviews sourced from the Internet for this project provide additional data that document the inequalities in the workplace as a result of not only intergenerational but racial inequalities, compounding already existing issues in French society for the youth of the nation. In some instances, this provokes an exodus and in others, a difficult state of affairs for those who do not have the means, the linguistic and cultural competence or the confidence to venture abroad. This issue is further discussed in Chapter 4. (For further information, see Banks, 2010). A great number of French exiles have no intention of returning home, treating Sarkozy’s attempts to woo them back with contempt, suggesting he is an embarrassment (Walden, 2008). Not even Sarkozy’s historic speech in London could persuade 300 000 expatriates to return home, a finding hammered home by a French polling company, the TNS SOFRES that surveyed French expatriates abroad. They found 93% of French émigrés satisfied with their lives abroad and 25% declaring that they ‘never’ expected to return home (Applebaum, 2007). After scrutinising the developments or lack thereof, in France from across the channel after Sarkozy had been in office for several months as president, many swiftly denigrated the pledges of their leader as mere political hyperbole. Their


9

disenchantment lay in the agonisingly slow rate of progress of the proposed reforms, the bureaucratic machine still cranking at the same laborious pace. Stereotypically, French resistance to change is not a new concept and changing French psyche is not an easy feat. Although Nicolas Sarkozy acknowledged that France could not lead Europe by being anti-American, anti-enlargement and anti-reform, he does not seem to have convinced his constituents to be like-minded. Prior to his election as President of France in 2007, the Sarkozy vision was that a forward looking France would be a formidable force to contend with if it combined the rhetoric of social Europe with a reformist, integrationist agenda (Leonard, 2007). This was certainly a dignified position to assume but the wheels of change appear to be grinding a little too slowly for the French expatriates to envisage returning. Conversely, prior to his election, Nicolas Sarkozy was revered among the successful young French expatriates in New York. In 2007, in Time magazine on the iPad, one of these expatriates, Camille Agon wrote:

Chanting and singing [La Marseillaise], these talented and ambitious young expatriates were celebrating the triumph of the principles of hard work, individuality and merit in a country whose dysfunctional economy had forced them to choose a voluntary exile in order to pursue their career potential. To them including myself, Sarkozy represents the hope that one day they will be able to chase their entrepreneurial dreams in the land of their birth (Agon, 2007 p. 1).

It is impossible to tell whether these expatriates have returned to France but reports indicate that since the GFC many French exiles, especially those initially contracted to work abroad by French companies, have headed home as their situation in foreign countries has become tenuous. However, the trend appears to be different in Asia as the French expatriate to other Asian countries instead of returning home. Nonetheless, the dissatisfaction the returnees feel upon resuming French positions, if they manage to find employment in these difficult economic circumstances, is fuelling a desire to leave once again. The reverse culture shock they experience upon returning to France is increasing in intensity as research shows the management of the return to be a constant negative when expatriates as well as academic sojourners go home (N. Adler, 1981; Patron, 2007). The insularity of their fellow nationals towards their achievements abroad is not new. It is well known that many French companies do not recognise the diplomas and the experience French educated people have acquired abroad, placing little value on the intercultural competence developed outside of France. It seems certain that should they secure employment, the prospect of advancement through the system is highly unlikely (Jasor, De Grandi, & Senges, 2009). From a different perspective, many expatriates envisage returning home for retirement. This in itself may provoke serious problems with the growing number of elderly people who form the generation of the Papy Boomers.3 As many of the intellectual underclass begrudge the ageing Baby Boomers the ease with which they have obtained and held on to their dream careers during Les Trente

CHAPTER 1

10

Glorieuses, ‘Thirty Glorious Years’ (1945–1975) following the end of WWII in 1945 in France), the ageing population has become a source of concern for France as for many other first world nations. As Europeans worry that jobs are going offshore, the greying population who do not belong to the middle and upper classes are creating headaches for leaders who must finance a comprehensive social safety net (Dapice, 2006). Governments clearly must devise economic measures that will guarantee the welfare of the ageing population. Neither the intellectual underclass, nor the less educated youth are going to willingly take on this task, unless government policies leave them no option through onerous taxes, if and when they finally end up in secure employment. The animosity directed at the retiring generation of workers is exemplified in a comment from a member of the intellectual underclass:

Key posts are all held by personalities from the 1968 generation who get here at the end of a chequered but fulfilling career ... When they hire young people they only take graduates from the grandes écoles, people who’ve been schooled in economic pragmatism. Libération is a case in point. So you get sales people dressed up as publishers who can’t stand their brainy interns because they are reminded of their own ignorance (Chollet, 2006 p. 5).

Where does that leave Generation Xers? Similarly to Chauvel’s (2006a) arguments, Spitz (2006) posits that in the next thirty years the number of pensions will double, but there will be fewer people in the workforce to support them. He believes that young people are being held to ransom by the ageing Baby Boomers and that they may refuse to foot the bill (Applebaum, 2007). In justification of the qualms of the young generation in France, Spitz has identified some alarming issues: greater numbers of retirees and fewer workers contributing to superannuation funds and paying taxes; an education system hostile in the face of reforms; an ageing political contingent, the oldest in Europe, attempting to represent the youth; an uncontrollable national debt (Testot, 2006). This situation is exacerbated because the life expectancy of the Papy Boomers has been prolonged thanks to the medical advances of the last century. Who will support this ageing population who live into their nineties if the exodus of young talent is not stemmed? Is the greying population also about to become statistics in yet another modern underclass? In Australia, where the politics of immigration are constantly under scrutiny there are some who are lobbying for a boost in skilled immigration to offset the retirement of Baby Boomers as the only answer to the problem of the ageing population. France’s policies on selective immigration may not be that far removed but the implications involved with this polemic issue are far more alarming when one considers that they are part of a larger European Union without frontiers. The findings of this inquiry suggest that France is ready for another revolution reminiscent of the May 1968 rebellion, as increasing numbers of professionals and tradespeople all march in protest of disastrous government policies and practices. The youth of today might well believe that it is their right to orchestrate their own May ‘68, taking to the streets in true French tradition to reclaim what is rightfully


11

theirs – economic security through a socio-economic model comparable to that of their parents’ generation. Is it so immoral to defend job security and quality of work, demanding that labour laws be reformed? Where else but in France, where people are reputed to be contestataires ‘against the establishment’, can one witness the sight of undertakers with their lugubrious coffins marching alongside workers’ unions, scientists and medical people wearing masks? Academics and students and representatives from most sectors of the workforce all participated in an unprecedented manifestation of solidarity against the right-wing government in 2009 and again in 2010 in protest of austerity measures. The following comment aptly sets the mood of all workers in France. It is derived from my interview with a French academic, Dr Jacqueline Macleod, whose discussions on French education and other polemic issues have proved invaluable for this inquiry.

I believe there will be a revolution. Everybody is ready now. Not all classes though, maybe not the very rich because they have too much to lose. They have the support of the government who hope that this group will kick-start the economy. I mean this is the first time since ‘68 that we see workers kidnapping their managers. They are holding them to ransom, figuratively. The ransom is to keep the talks going. They have physically kidnapped them in their offices ... That’s why I think this country is ready for a revolution. And during the last demonstration I even saw undertakers striking because they were wanting better salaries. Although you can’t say that, with undertaking, there is a mort de saison ‘dead/low season’, pardon the pun! I saw it with my own eyes. Undertakers striking and they had coffins on their shoulders (Macleod, April, 2009).

In reference to yet another uprising, Sabatier (2006) posits that the only similarities between the ‘near-mythical’ student uprising of May 1968 and the protest movement which came to a head in 2005 concern the coming-of-age of an entire generation, through street confrontation with a conservative government. He argues that during the 1968 revolution, as France was confident in its economic status and post-war social model the youth protested against the yoke of a parochial society and traditional culture in an effort to modernise and globalise it. Today, France is already there and so its youth is largely objecting to failed policies (Sabatier, 2006). Finding no other way to be heard, the French do what they characteristically know best, march in protest. Armand is part of the expatriate cohort of my inquiry living in Cambridge. He can understand that these unrests in France can generate a revolution but he asserts:

For a true revolution to happen, I mean not just a change of government, but a true revolution, it comes from a lot of frustration and anger of the people. It’s way much more true at the moment. So all that is very worrying … It’s definitely easier to leave. Revolution, as many good changes as it can bring, it means also hardship. I don’t think that that’s something that people take on lightly, you know. Even if it is consciously or unconsciously, but they do

CHAPTER 1

12

realise that revolution brings as well many destructive effects (Armand April, 2009).

Given this pessimistic outlook, the future of young, educated French people is in the balance if the economic and social conditions in France do not undergo a more serious and rapid transformation. The legitimacy and intensity of ‘French brain drain’, of recent times questioned and treated derisorily by some researchers, sociologists, politicians and journalists as to its status of ‘myth or reality’, is finally being acknowledged as a modern phenomenon in France, not to mention Britain and other European countries that are not immune to these trends. Why should issues of intergenerational inequalities and brain drain be of concern to France and indeed to cultures outside Europe? What are the consequences of existing inequalities between the Baby Boomers and Generation X? What are the ramifications of the precarious employment conditions of the young in France? What is the price that France’s economy must pay for this seemingly perennial problem? Is the brain drain myth or reality? What implications does this increasing exodus of young French graduates have on the future of this once great nation, one of the founding and leading member countries of the European Union? What are the domino effects on other European Union member countries that are experiencing similar problems? It is my contention that France will continue to ignore the plight of its young generation at her own peril. If serious measures are not taken to reform the social system, to inject much needed funds into education and research, to address issues of intergenerational inequalities between the Baby Boomers and the young generation, to kick start the economy once again by creating more jobs, the country will experience greater brain drain of talented graduates to more secure economies. Continued inflexibility of the labour market in the face of globalisation will spell disaster for the status of France as a wealthy country in the global arena. This book exposes troubling issues concerning a vulnerable sector of French society. Parallels between France and other nations in the European Union will be revealed and this research will set the benchmark for further comparative studies in other European countries. The implications for borderless higher education are predictable if the situation of brain drain is not arrested through significant changes to the policies and practices covering a broad spectrum of domains as the ease of academic mobility will attract greater numbers of French youth abroad who may never return home. A new immigration and integration law was passed in 2006, effective in 2007, aiming to overhaul France’s immigration system by endowing the government with new powers to encourage highly-skilled migration as one of its objectives. However, in spite of this expected influx of motivated and talented individuals, France cannot possibly be unaware that in this global market there is fierce competition for international talent. With the ageing population factored into the equation, serious measures will need to be implemented to attract French expatriates back home and to ensure their loyalty. This book aims to identify the most important factors, from the perspective of the participants of this inquiry, that are contributing to the alleged brain drain of early and mid-career French graduates and graduating students, to discover the


13

perceived value of their cultural capital in France and abroad, to examine the social structure of French society, the economic rewards of their education, their language acquisition, the appreciation of their intercultural experiences and ultimately the social value of their identity as French people abroad and in France. In this qualitative ethnographic study, Bourdieu’s (Pierre Bourdieu, 1984, 1990; 1977) and Chauvel’s (1998, 2008, 2006b) works will provide the framework that will inform debate and support my data. Bourdieu’s concepts of capital and related fields, his theories on education and the structure of French society will be critically evaluated and employed to analyse the data collected from French nationals and expatriates from 2008 to 2010. Bourdieu and Passeron’s (1977) theories of cultural reproduction, the intergenerational transmission of class privileges and the sociology of education are equally important for this inquiry. The expatriates were residing in the UK, Australia, Spain and Brazil at the time of collection of the data. Chauvel’s research on intergenerational inequalities will be examined in light of the findings of my study. The implications of the research will ultimately be discussed and suggestions and strategies proposed for a slowing of the brain drain after assessment of proposals emerging from ministerial edicts and leading organisations, professionals, educators and participants of my research. In France in particular, the difficulty in obtaining reliable data lies in the incomparability of the populations targeted in the research that one is attempting to undertake. Of course, statistics on many categories discussed in political and public debate exist but it appears there are no data describing the situation of minorities in France, usually by reference to ethnic and racial minorities. The group under study in this book concerns students, graduates and expatriates but statistics on this group have also been exceedingly difficult to determine. Simon (2008) argues ‘this state of affairs in French statistics-gathering has been the subject of major criticism for some twenty years now.’ In her interview, Danielle illucidates this point: ‘It’s not possible to conduct research on ethnic origins in France regarding Article 1 of the 1958 French Constitution which states: La France est une République indivisible (France is an indivisible Republic) (Danielle, April, 2008). It is certainly an expedient loophole. OECD data (2005a) on international migration do not give a clear picture either of the relative scale of transitions across borders. They argue that in particular, data that are readily available on migration movements do not indicate a clear idea of the scale of movements across countries primarily as a result of the nomenclature of the different categories of expatriates, the length of their stay and the circumstances of their move amongst others. Many exiles are classed as ‘temporary residents’ in many countries where immigration protocols are complex, thus affecting their status and the different qualifications used for ‘immigrants’ make it difficult to obtain definitive statistics. The French sociologist, anthropologist and philosopher Pierre Bourdieu’s (1886) sociological concepts of cultural capital and social class structures are useful for explaining aspects of my research as his philosophical discourse is closely tied to the issues pertaining to this book, particularly the significant impact that his work has had on education and pedagogy and other socio-cultural issues.

CHAPTER 1

14

Qualitative and quantitative researchers have proliferated, critiqued, analysed and defined Bourdieu’s theories of cultural reproduction and the intergenerational transmission of class privileges and the sociology of education. However, as Bourdieu’s conceptual fields are highly complex, it is impossible to do justice to the prolific research that he carried out over several decades in the context of this book. This is due to space constraints as my project is quite ambitious in attempting to cover the vast array of factors that can influence the brain drain of young determined French graduates. Therefore, my data will be interpreted in light of Bourdieu’s theories, providing the framework that reveals the dynamics of power relations in the social life of the respondents of my inquiry. According to Bourdieu, an individual is defined not only by social class membership, but by all the forms of capital that he or she can demonstrate through social relations, such as the value of their education and their social networks that reproduce inequality. For example, graduates may utilise their social networks to secure a position over another candidate who is hired through meritocratic avenues. The issue of the ‘cold war’ between the Baby Boomers and the ‘baby losers’ or the lost generation who consider that they have been sacrificed for the pleasure and leisure of their parents (Burke, 2006) is gaining momentum in France. At the root of the dissatisfaction with French society, intergenerational inequalities constitute an intrinsic part of my research. Sociologist at the National Foundations for Political Science, Louis Chauvel’s (1998, 2006a) research on this question along with Pierre Bourdieu’s conceptual framework on cultural capital and associated concepts underpin my study and inform the arguments in this book. Chauvel’s work will be analysed to determine whether the growing resentment of Generation X young and mid-career graduates, existing tertiary students, together with members of the twenty-forty age groups is fuelling a revolution for some, whilst for those who can see no solution to their predicament, expatriation is a more viable and desirable option. Chauvel’s views have created furious debate among the Baby Boomers (many of whom hold prestigious positions in the administration of the country) and members of the media, strongly refuting his arguments that Generation ‘68 (the eighteen-year-olds in May ‘68 who took part in the revolution) are responsible for the woes of their children. In light of the brewing unrest among Generation Xers, Chauvel’s (2006a) arguments have produced unlikely allies for the movement of change. Those ready to retaliate are emerging among the ranks of economists, sociologists and angry thirty-something critics as well as, surprisingly, ‘a few self-hating turncoats’ from the Baby Boomer generation themselves (Burke, 2006). Increasingly harbouring sentiments of anger and hatred toward their elders, along with their supporters, the ‘baby losers’ are on a quest to arrest the widening gap between generations in France, believing that their parents’ generation has left them with nothing to look forward to except for an exhausted and lazy society. Burke suggests that the privileges that many from the upper echelons of society currently enjoy have all but disappeared as those aged twenty-forty are unlikely to move up the social ladder to enjoy such a lifestyle (Ibid.). Is Chauvel’s criticism harsh or justifiable when he suggests that for the first time in recent history Generation Xers can


15

expect a lower standard of living when compared to their parents’ lifestyle primarily because they have refused to share? He argues ‘there has been a massive pillaging of the resources of one generation by another’ (Chauvel, 2006a). Chauvel is not alone in this judgment. Patrick Artus, an economist and co-author of Comment nous avons ruiné nos enfants (How we have ruined our children) with Marie-Paule Virard, (Artus & Virard, 2006) among other journalists and Chauvéliens sympathisers, has also espoused views that clearly indict Generation ‘68 for the shocking predicament in which the young generation find themselves. However, there are dissenters of this view, among the most vocal, Claudine Attias-Donfut, André Masson, Research Director of CNRS, Jean-Claude Trichet who is President of the European Central Bank, who have become the best allies of Generation ‘68, along with many outraged Baby Boomers who refute Chauvel’s arguments in myriad discussion forums online. Magazines such as Le Point, Libération, Le Monde, and The Observer have come under vitriolic attack from these anti-Chauvéliens saying that their reputation has been seriously compromised by publishing such articles that vilify the Baby Boomers. In addition to the issues introduced above, racial and work place inequalities also feature as part of my research as several respondents from working or immigrant classes have managed to climb the social ladder to attain an educational level equal to that of the middle class participants. It is however, at this point that the groups become conflated as they have reached a stale mate where neither group, irrespective of educational qualifications and social standing can expect to enjoy the fruits of their labour. Discrimination upon hiring is a significant issue in France but due to space constraints this area will feature only briefly in this book with further writings reserved for journal articles.

METHODOLOGY

This book combines qualitative and quantitative data. The quantitative data are sourced from reports such as the OECD where statistics are obtained from census forms and immigration figures. Innumerable articles and blogs posted on the Internet, arguing the pros and cons of globalisation, the myth or reality of brain drain and social and political issues influencing this phenomenon have been tracked to authenticate the theses discussed in this book. The investigative techniques for the qualitative analyses consisted of semi-structured, tape recorded interviews, transcriptions and textual analyses. Open-ended questions were used in order to provide a personal dimension to the study on many areas covering the educational background, foreign language acquisition, employment experiences and study abroad experiences of the respondents. This format allowed for freedom of expression and was expressly conducted in French and English to put the respondents at ease and to gauge their proficiency in English language (cf. Patron, 2007). An iterative process of collecting and analysing data was utilised in this project until saturation was achieved. The data were used to assess the incidence of brain drain of educated young and mid-career French individuals to Anglo-Saxon

CHAPTER 1

16

countries predominantly as a result of dissatisfaction with the political, economic, social and educational conditions as well as the current employment scene in France. Factors affecting brain drain were investigated through the research questions and implications of the research outlined. The initial collection of data for this inquiry consisted of one and a half hour interviews in French and English representing a total of thirty-eight respondents from 2008 to 2010, twenty French nationals and eighteen French expatriates. The cohorts were unevenly matched among the French nationals, nine males and eleven females and in the expatriate cohort, eight females and ten males. The participants were selected through the assistance of a tertiary institution in France and Bond University in Australia and subsequent participants were contracted through a snowball effect throughout France and abroad. The age group of the respondents was purposefully extended to cover a range between twenty-one and forty-eight years in order to assess the relational outcomes of the project, to examine how educational background, cultural capital and career decisions have affected the status of the young graduates and tertiary students as opposed to mid-career graduates, especially concerning their motivation for expatriation. It is predicted that the older members of the project will be predominantly found in the expatriate contingent and their bank of cultural and intercultural capital will be retrospectively assessed in comparison with those at the beginning of their careers. This methodology allows for a cross-section of individual experiences across a broader spectrum of society whilst respecting the criteria set for the project. After analysis of these ethnographic/phenomenological accounts, my qualitative research findings will be compared to literature review of OECD and other reports, ancillary research studies and anecdotal evidence sourced from testimonials online. As organisations such as the OECD that gather data globally do not include a registry of such testimonials from expatriates for public use, this resource cannot be verified but will nonetheless provide a convincing argument on the issue of brain drain. Together with this the rich text data will allow me to ascertain the degree of brain drain of talented, educated French individuals to other more favourable destinations and the factors influencing their relocation. Finally an indication of the expatriates’ willingness to return home will be considered. The data were analysed using qualitative methodologies. Some transcription of the audio-taped interviews was carried out concurrently with the interviewing process with the aim of facilitating the analytic process. This methodology assists in the preliminary stages of thematic analysis of the data as well as being instrumental in gauging the efficacy of the research questions. This process allowed me to assess the types of responses generated in the first set of data in order to make any necessary changes. The interpretational analysis of data provided the formulation of themes and code patterns to explain the phenomena in question (cf. Patron, 2007). My inquiry, based on French graduates and tertiary students randomly selected in France and abroad produced disquieting results as to the factors that have prompted their departure. Those who remained in France were disgruntled with their lives and their employment prospects. The participants came from a variety of


17

professions, social and educational backgrounds allowing for study abroad opportunities. The common denominators consisted of a secondary or tertiary education, study abroad experiences where they acquired intercultural competence and the fact that they spoke a language other than French, predominantly English. In this book, I am using the voices of my thirty-eight participants to explore the concepts introduced in this chapter. All of the participants have been given pseudonyms which will be used to refer to them in the text. I have included a table of my participants in Appendix 1 with their relevant demographic details.

CHAPTER SUMMARY

Chapter 1 The introductory chapter provides the background and context of the study. The theoretical foundations are developed with an overview of the works of Pierre Bourdieu (1977, 1984, 1990) on cultural capital and Louis Chauvel (1998; 2006) on intergenerational inequalities. Chauvel’s research on this question together with Bourdieu’s conceptual framework on cultural capital and associated concepts underpin my study and inform the debate in this book. Chauvel’s work is employed to evaluate the contention that the growing resentment of early and mid-career graduates, existing tertiary students, together with members of the twenty-forty age groups is fuelling a revolution for some, whilst for those who can see no solution to their predicament, expatriation is a more viable and desirable option. Finally I introduce the hypothesis that the interrelated effects of past and current government administration policies, in conjunction with troublesome social issues partially arising from intergenerational inequalities; and pedagogical and labour market practices, have contributed to the increasing brain drain of young educated individuals to foreign countries where a spirit of meritocracy prevails. Chapter 2 focuses on globalisation, academic mobility and the young French educated sector. The globalisation debate features government and public sentiment on this issue, providing a critical analysis of research on this substantive topic. Other perspectives emerging from journalists’ views and other sources offer a vigorous debate on the phenomenon. The dichotomous views, for and against globalisation, serve as a backdrop for comparison with the views of the participants of my inquiry to determine French position on this phenomenon and to explicate how the effects of globalisation have affected international academic mobility. Testimonies from my data and anecdotal evidence sourced from Internet blogs are provided throughout the book to substantiate or refute arguments proposed on many issues concerning the predicament of the educated sector. Academic mobility and brain drain are central themes for this book and are discussed in detail in this chapter. I draw on the literature review and reports from various organisations as well as French professionals from various fields who have been interviewed to corroborate the premise that as a result of growing dissatisfaction with the political, economic and social fabric of their country, significantly higher numbers of graduates and mid-career graduates are leaving France than officially recorded. Their views appear throughout the book. A section on the French and the Internet is included to elucidate issues concerning the late emergence of French Internet onto the global arena.

CHAPTER 1

18

In Chapter 3 I assess the views derived from my data against a critical analysis of Bourdieu’s theories on French education and the development of cultural capital and intercultural competence. His concepts of habitus and field, reproduction and intergenerational transmission are briefly explained to assist in the analysis of the data. Findings relating to the social structure of French society are also examined in light of Bourdieu’s theories. Together with Louis Chauvel’s research on intergenerational inequalities, these authors’ works shed light on critical issues affecting the educated sector and French society. The anecdotal testimonies of many French nationals who have proffered their opinions on the status and work conditions of French graduates in France and abroad online are analysed together with the views of the participants of my research project in several chapters in order to authenticate my findings. In Chapter 4 I identify the most significant factors that have provoked the brain drain of French early and mid-career graduates and address the significant social issues that have affected the lives of this sector of society. I critique the literature review on Louis Chauvel’s (1998, 2006a) research on intergenerational inequalities that inform debate on the provocative argument that the Baby Boomer generation is largely responsible for the disastrous socio-economic position of Generation X in France today. I discuss the substantive areas of precarious employment and the context of the French Social Model and the role of President Sarkozy’s and former administrations in relation to existing policies on the labour market and education. Integration issues are identified as significant in the decision of nationals to emigrate but given the extent of research in this area, this will only be briefly examined in the context of this book. The literature on these subjects helps to identify if past and existing political strategies have influenced the disastrous social and economic status of the educated sector. The experiences of both the French nationals and the expatriates feature in this and other chapters. Chapter 5 deals with the personal experiences of young educated French individuals and mid-career graduates in the French context. Testimonials are sourced from my data in order to substantiate or refute claims made in the literature review with regard to the plight of graduates in France and their decision to emigrate. The value of their cultural and intercultural capital in France, meritocracy, employment issues and economic rewards are discussed against the backdrop of Bourdieu’s framework on the social structure of French society where social class configurations are deemed to affect the educational and career outcome of individuals. Intercultural capital is inextricably linked to cultural capital as defined by Bourdieu (1886) and can be conceived as the type of social and cultural capital that comprises the experiences, dispositions, knowledge and understandings of an individual that result from interactions with others in an intercultural context (Luke & Goldstein, 2006). Chauvel’s arguments are assessed in light of findings from my data. In Chapter 6, the value of French cultural capital and intercultural capital abroad is assessed in conjunction with the development of linguistic and intercultural competence. Participants’ testimonies are used to authenticate the hypothesis made in this book that inter-related factors linked with government policies, troublesome


19

social issues and pedagogical and labour market practices are provoking the brain drain of educated French individuals. The social structure of French society, cultural capital, employment issues and economic rewards are once again analysed from an international perspective to evaluate the findings on the French nationals and the expatriate cohorts of my study. The perception of one’s cultural identity is important during intercultural encounters and for this reason questions of French identity as an asset or a handicap are examined against existing literature on L’Exception Culturelle Française, French Cultural Exception. This section provides a contrast on the perceived value of being French abroad to examine how this nationality is distinguished globally and the reasons for foreigners’ views. In Chapter 7 I evaluate the immediate and future consequences of the predicament of early and mid-career graduates in France and provide the implications of the findings of my inquiry. I propose recommendations sourced from various government agencies and organisations, from interviewed French professionals and from my data with the aim of averting further brain drain. The aim is to raise awareness in the departments of the current French administration and to suggest more viable strategies to retain talented graduates. In my concluding remarks I appraise whether a combination of factors has affected the precarious situation of Generation X graduates in France, thus provoking the brain drain of the early and mid-career educated sector to predominantly Anglo-Saxon countries. Alternatively I assess whether economic and educational policies engineered by past and present government administrations have been instrumental in determining their current circumstances. Closing arguments will determine whether intergenerational inequalities and the Baby Boomers are responsible for the difficult state of affairs concerning France’s graduates.

NOTES

1 Introduced in 1808 by Napoléon 1, the French baccalauréat, more colloquially known as le bac is an academic qualification taken by French and international students at the end of their secondary education. This is the recognised diploma that allows pupils to pursue tertiary studies (Wikipedia, Retrieved 8/11/11). + 5 indicate the number of years of tertiary study undertaken post-baccalauréat.

2 Enarques is a powerful old boys’ network and the process of their advancement known as ‘enarchisation’. Its members are selected from within the civil service or chosen from among the top students attending France’s most academic universities during a gruelling three-month entrance procedure culminating in an oral examination. This small cadre of technocrats are trained to run the country and are automatically granted powerful positions in French civil administration (Gentleman, 2003).

3 Babies born after WWII are now becoming grandfathers (papy in French) as they reach retirement age. This is a logical consequence of the baby boom after the war, with increased life expectancy and lower mortality rates provoking demographic ageing in first world countries. The Papy Boom phenomenon is expected to significantly influence the economy of a nation especially concerning welfare regimes, superannuation and stabilisation of the active population. (Wikipedia, Retrieved Dec. 17. 2010).

21

CHAPTER 2

GLOBALISATION, MOBILITY AND THE YOUNG EDUCATED SECTOR

With the advent of globalisation in today’s terms, an unprecedented number of youth from many first world nations have joined the dynamic wave of global academic mobility, lured to foreign shores at times diametrically opposed to their cultures of origin. There appears to be minimal dissension in debates weighing up the merits against the drawbacks of student mobility that has grown exponentially over the last couple of decades especially. This human aspect of globalisation is perceived quite distinctly from the more capitalist economic version, the global system where capital, goods, and ideas cross borders almost instantly. Nonetheless, numerous countries are resisting change and fighting against a powerful global surge that threatens to leave them in its wake if they fail to modernise their social and economic systems. Research shows that there is far more attention given to the resistance of a nation to globalisation than adaptation to this phenomenon. Globalisation has forced nations large and small, first and third world, to re-examine the way they manage their businesses, to reassess their economic policies in light of the global marketplace, to embrace internationalisation, particularly in terms of financial, educational, political, military and cultural interactions worldwide. Sweeping reforms have become necessary for some countries that needed to become au fait with the swift expansion of knowledge and communication globally in all spheres of life, especially the political arena, the education sector and the cultural scene. According to public opinion in first world countries, developing countries such as China and India are proceeding a little too zealously with their economic development and at the expense of environmental issues, ignoring the impact of their race to catch up to the developed world. Dissidents of this view would argue that they should also be given the chance to spread their wings as the West developed without considering the environment. Economic reforms began in China in the seventies and this country has since been one of the world’s fastest growing economies, currently renowned as a global economic and trade powerhouse. In spite of opening its borders to trade and capital, China remains insular in many respects such as information flows, refusing to become part of the global village culturally, socially and politically as interference from the US and other western countries is not tolerated. There is little doubt that nations such as China, those belonging to South East Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Russia have acknowledged the benefits of opening up to trade and foreign investment and their progress continues relentlessly (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). France is one country whose population appears to remain divided on the question of globalisation, albeit the scale is tipped towards the sceptical, as the

CHAPTER 2

22

French cling to the State. All the while, Americanisation and the all-encompassing and intrusive nature and velocity of the Internet create a huge impact on French culture. French reaction to globalisation appears to be quite radical, perceiving the phenomenon largely as a threat to cultural identity, a cause of social inequality, a danger to French jobs and community and not to be treated with derision, a threat to France’s gastronomy (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). French people are anxious that they may lose their distinctive culture, their traditions and their language, intrinsic aspects that define France among other concerns. It is difficult to dispute that the French live to eat and do not eat to live. It is therefore not surprising that food is high on the agenda for the anti-globalisation movement. French haute cuisine is one of France’s greatest sources of national pride and the ubiquitous McDonald’s fast food chains are perceived as a direct affront to French identity (Meunier, 2002). The McDo is perceived by some in France as ‘the Trojan Horse of globalisation and the scourge of local produce and long lunches’ (Samuel, 2009 p. 2). The battle appears to be lost according to recent statistics, the chain claiming that ‘France has become McDonald’s largest market in the world outside the US’ (Ibid.). Many Francophones, especially in Africa do not appear to fear globalisation as much as the French nationals. They do not consider French language and culture as declining, quite the opposite. It is thriving as never before, if one considers the view of Abdou Diouf, former president of Senegal who is the secretary general of the Francophone organisation (Kimmelman, 2010). Mr Diouf considers that the French language is now in Africa. When polyglot writers from Africa and many other Francophone nations choose to write in French as opposed to another from their linguistic repertoire they see this as a choice, not necessarily signifying loyalty, political, cultural or otherwise, to France. Mr Diouf argues ‘the more we have financial, military and economic globalization, the more we find common cultural references and common values, which include diversity. And diversity, not uniformity, is the real result of globalization.’ Unmistakably, having a language in common does not connote a common political or cultural point of view (Kimmelman, 2010 p. 2). In this article it is reported that when the French nationals finally admit that there are benefits to globalisation that they have been engaged in stealthily for years, perhaps their inherent fear of losing their cultural identity might be dispelled when they realise that this phenomenon has produced an even greater interest in French language and culture worldwide. It might perhaps be timely for the French literary Establishment to value Francophone literature as equal to French literature. The French economy is traditionally perceived as heavily controlled, anti-liberal, over-regulated and protectionist. These factors are the hallmarks of France’s dirigiste economic model, where although the market is allowed to function, supervision by the State is ubiquitous. This is executed through high taxation and spending, interventionist industrial policies, close ties with the corporate world and widespread state-ownership of finance and means of production (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). The notion that the State should monitor and steer economic development is deeply entrenched in the French psyche, even if


23

the combination of globalisation, European Integration and privatisation has progressively worn down its power (Frost, 2002). Over the last couple of decades, France has witnessed a slow shift toward more liberal market economics thanks to Europeanisation and globalisation. This progress has been slow because of the stance taken by many French citizens on this issue, especially as globalisation is often perceived as synonymous with Americanisation. This essentially translates as ‘US dominance’, confirming the opinion that the French are the most anxious about the effects of globalisation among their European neighbours. The Centre for European Reform recorded 72% of French people who saw globalisation as a threat to their employment and to French businesses in general (Artus, Cohen, & Pisani-Ferry, 2007). My qualitative research findings, based on thirty-eight interviews of French nationals and expatriates aged between twenty-one and forty-eight, place the participants comfortably within that percentage. Mixed views on the globalisation debate from the ethnographic interviews are elaborated throughout this chapter. One participant from the expatriate study stands alone among her cohort of participants, articulating contrastive views about French society and disputing the traditional perception that French society is controlled by the State. In her interview, Chantal, an expatriate professor in Australia who is an expert in the field of French political science and culture, acknowledges that the erroneous views expressed above are widely conceived abroad.

French history is a double history. There is a history of the rhetoric, of the ideology, of the principle and there is the social history and the history of the practice. And so when people study France from the outside, they study the rhetoric, the principles and the theory. And then they come up with verdicts, diagnoses … which produce a caricature of what French society is like, that it is totally dominated by the State … At the ideological level definitely yes but on another level no because … of what the republicans of the third republic realised when it came to deal with the social tensions that were linked with the rise of the working class movement. Trade Unions were prohibited in France because of the foundational law of French republicans and Les Lois Le Chapelier, (Le Chapelier Laws) which prohibited the formation of associations because they were considered to be in a sense a danger … revolutionary because they would in fact perpetuate the hierarchical structure of corporations. In fact, republicans had wanted to establish a direct relation between individuals and the State when the loyal individuals were linked to the nation and not to the intermediate groups, which were the estates of the Ancien Régime (The Old Regime) (Chantal, July, 2010).

Chantal justifies her stance on this issue by stressing that France became a society that functions similarly to the British or Anglo-American civil society, that is, autonomous from the State. She explains that Les Lois Le Chapelier that were linked to the associations were revolutionary. The republicans thought that they had to ban trade unions as this went against the basic principles of the French Republic until the republican thinkers realised that this was not viable. Society

CHAPTER 2

24

essentially needed to have markings and to represent itself. Chantal outlines two previous laws, the first granting the right of association for trade union purposes and the second, the broader law of 1901 which basically removed what had been the absolute monopoly of the State on the organisation of society. Chantal concludes that finally the society formed what is referred to as Reconnue d’Utilité Publique (Official status of Association and Registered Charity) decreeing that any association in France registered with this body could obtain this status according to the law of 1901. Associations such as this developed by French society have led to what in the British or Anglo-American world is called civil society, by definition allowing the society to organise itself outside of the State. On an ideological level however, Chantal concedes the State still wants to appear as having the monopoly of everything that happens in society but in practice it is wrong in her opinion. In practice, society has a lot of autonomy and organises itself and resists. Through mass mobilisation they can resist but Chantal asserts that this is a hanger-on from the revolution approach of 1789. She cites the example of seasoned French politicians who are still wedded to the idea that la volonté populaire (the will of the people) still needs to be considered as they are suspicious of associations, believing that this will must express itself as a mass movement in the streets. According to literature on this subject, many characteristics of dirigisme still persist in France. With over 25% of the country’s working population employed as public servants, taxation rates and government spending are among the steepest in the world and the central role of the State continues to be endorsed throughout the government and industry by the influential elite – an exclusive faction perpetuated by the French educational system of the grandes écoles (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). In this land of paradoxes, whilst France is seen to be publicly resisting globalisation it appears to be stealthily embracing the phenomenon. Sabatier (2006) suggests ‘the French Government, which has engaged in stealth globalization while espousing populist anti-globalization rhetoric has been caught in its own trap’ (Sabatier, 2006 p. 1). The former French Trade Minister, now Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde even remarked that: ‘It’s paradoxical: the openness of France alongside our fears of the world’ (Bennhold, 2007b p. 1). Patrick Sabatier, deputy editor of the left-wing Paris daily, Libération, is among many who have asserted that statistics and policy developments across a broad range of sectors indicate that France is opening up to the outside world. Sabatier argues that this ‘stealthy approach’ has created two Frances, a two-tier system – one that is creating an intricate system of benefits for the ‘haves’ of society, made up of the moneyed classes, shareholders, property owners and also employees securely positioned with permanent contracts with large companies or working in the public sector. This group enjoyed the advantages of the safety net and the liberalising policies of the Chirac administration whilst the ‘have nots’ constituted the ever-increasing masses of unemployed (over 10% of the labour force in 2006). The latter group formed the ranks of workers in precarious, short-term, low-skilled and poorly-paid jobs, coined Macjobs (Meunier, 1999). In 2011, this situation shows no signs of


25

improving in spite of President Sarkozy’s plans of reforms in various sectors of the country. The fragmentation of France essentially stems from the stalling of economic growth during Chirac’s presidency as workers negotiated contracts that cost more than the economy could withstand. This was in stark contrast with the boom years of the older generation where most sectors of the population, employers, shareholders, and company bosses were affluent. The wealthy sector comprised of Baby Boomers in France is increasingly being apportioned a great deal of blame, proponents of this view ranging from Chauvel (2008) to various other prominent figures in the media and political commentators. A great number of the ‘have nots’ unexpectedly belonged to the middle class (Sabatier, 2006). The class system in France and the ascenseur social, (the social ladder) and the intricacies of this issue will be examined in detail in the context of Bourdieu’s framework in Chapters 3 and 5. Sabatier argues that incongruously, anti-globalisation trends have been provoked by a social crisis emerging from that same success of the French economy’s opening up to global demands. Apart from the UK, France has attracted the most foreign investment in Europe, globalisation representing a positive feature for large French companies. It is ironically the success of this economic sector that has generated suspicions among the general population that have ostensibly missed out on the financial benefits of globalisation. This situation has thus increased the gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ fuelling debate and discontent among the rest of the population (Sabatier, 2006). Findings from my inquiry among a cross-section of college-educated French national graduates and expatriates alike reflect Sabatier’s beliefs that this group is increasingly joining the ranks of the ‘have-nots.’ Many of the national contingent are rapidly becoming known as the new ‘intellectual underclass’ falling into the same economical sector as the suburban unschooled and unemployed that rioted in November 2005. Sabatier suggests that this protest was as much a social explosion as a problem of integration of immigrants or ethnic or religious tensions. The protesters were largely incensed, not so much against globalisation per se, but at professed injustices in the redistribution of its benefits and at the targeting of young people for special labour legislation. The inconsistencies in the policies of the conservative government following Chirac have generated a deep-seated mistrust of the political system. Sabatier provides glaring examples of such policies that emanate from the Chirac administration. For example, the Chirac government opened energy and transportation sectors to competition allowing foreigners freedom to work in France whilst lorry drivers for instance were subject to more stringent labour laws. Another patent example of injustice in the investment sector concerns the special tax status reserved for foreign investments by expatriates and multinationals. These examples among others paint a picture of acute domestic political crisis caused by a government that refused to engage, before the crisis, in discussions on proposed reforms in the labour and educational sectors (Sabatier, 2006).

CHAPTER 2

26

Inconsistencies in current government policies in relation to globalisation are evident in the data of this inquiry. At the time of this interview Danielle, who is a French academic, epitomised the intellectual underclass fast joining the ranks of the ‘have nots’ as she battled to obtain job security within a tertiary institution. Surviving on short term contracts, the expectant mother struggled to make ends meet for her family of two children. She explains her views on globalisation:

La mondialisation en tant que telle, je n’arrive pas très bien à me positionner parce que d’un côté je vois ça comme très dangereux. Par exemple sur le principe qu’on va mondialiser les systèmes de production dans le monde; c’est-à-dire qu’on va dire: ‘ça, y en a trop’; par exemple, la production de vins. (Danielle, April, 2008). Globalisation per se, I can’t quite position myself because on one hand I perceive it as very dangerous. For example, on the principle that production systems will be globalised in the world; that is, they’ll say: ‘there’s too much of this [product]’. For example, the wine industry.

Danielle has a dichotomous view on the subject and she elaborates what she and many other participants consider to be the dangers of globalisation. She has difficulty in positioning herself on the subject because she argues that in spite of the obvious advantages, she is more concerned about the globalising of production systems worldwide that have no consideration for the individual, such as small producers in the wine industry. If the powers that be decide that there is a glut of one type of wine on the market then the region producing this wine will be forced to limit or discontinue production thereby making their business obsolete. This applies equally for quotas imposed on the fishing industry in Europe she believes, effectively destroying family enterprises in the European Union. Danielle explains this also contributes to an increase in unemployment rates as international firms close down industrial sites in France to relocate abroad. The complete disregard for the individual and his family poses a big problem for Danielle, not to mention the subject of imported grains and the monopoly of American or multinational companies such as Monsanto endorsing genetically modified foods (GMO). Danielle perceives this as a threat that affects the safe production of cereals globally. Their introduction into France could potentially generate catastrophes that lead to food shortages. Danielle says: ‘Sarkozy, lui, malheureusement il en est pour. Mais lui, il est pour plein de choses à partir du moment où ça lui donne de l’argent. Ça on a tout de suite compris.’ (Danielle, April 2008). (Sarkozy is unfortunately for [globalisation]. But then he is in favour of many things as long as it generates money. That’s immediately clear!). In December 2011, however, the president in fact reaffirmed his opposition to GMO foods, a move that must surely reassure the public. It is interesting to note that the ‘sudden’ craze for natural foods constitutes a recent phenomenon in France, resulting from the convergence of several factors: a) a number of catastrophic food-related health scares such as ‘Mad Cow’ disease; b) agricultural labour unions that exploited the new interest in ‘natural foods’ for protectionism against the alleged evils of globalisation; and c) a general ban on


27

GMO products that halted imports of grains from the US. Quite apart from the underlying political and economic issues, the French public appears to have embraced the new trend out of nostalgia for the home grown products of days gone by (Terrell, Rogers, Kerr, & Spielmann, 2005). Globalisation has struck a particularly negative chord in France for several reasons: 1) Globalisation directly challenges the Hexagon’s dirigiste economic and political custom requiring the government to relinquish its control over the economy so that a freer market can develop and operate. It is ultimately difficult for the French to acknowledge the fact that their economic, social and cultural fate is governed less by the Elysée in Paris and increasingly by global influences (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). In addition, dirigisme does not endorse individualism in commerce and in contrast with the liberal economic tradition of the US, entrepreneurship is not encouraged. A provocative report in Time in Partnership with CNN by Peter Gumbel (2007) highlights the emigration of young ambitious French entrepreneurs, scientists and other graduates to countries promising greater career opportunities, more incentives and racial tolerance, less bureaucracy and less draconian work conditions. The report demonstrates that barriers to entrepreneurship and rewarding careers are contributing to the exodus of some of France’s best and brightest overseas to seek their fortune. Several examples from my first inquiry on French academic sojourners also support this finding. A number of participants from this project have now happily settled in Australia, Asia and other European countries (Patron, 2007). Gumbel (2007) explains that many of these graduates who are settled in lucrative positions show little inclination to return to a ‘dysfunctional France’. He argues: ‘The wave of émigrés can and does stand as an indictment of France’s condition … If France puts its house in order, those who left in the last few years could turn out to be just the injection of spirit it needs’ (Ibid.). Gumbel provides several examples of the successes of French expatriates, the talented Benoît Lavaud among them. Lavaud is a designer who works for a cosmetic company and who tried repeatedly to establish a luxury leather-goods brand in Paris. After multiple attempts to beat French bureaucracy, he subsequently established his own clothing brand in Japan. Lavaud could not comprehend how French authorities could stipulate that a start-up company with no revenues pay compulsory pension contributions (Ibid.). Another success story for a French expatriate entrepreneur concerns Olivier Cadic, whose biography is reported at Zoominfo (2008). At thirty-eight, he was founder and general manager of Info Elec in the UK. In 1997, he relocated his Paris-based business to Kent as a result of crippling taxes in France, his corporate taxes of 37% dramatically reduced to 20% in Britain. Even more significantly, his company’s social security costs dropped from a phenomenally high 48% for each employee down to just 10%. He now maintains that he has the world’s leading e-marketplace for his industry. Whilst still professing to love Paris, Cadic felt compelled to share his experiences, founding an association called ‘Free France, Free Enterprise’ aimed at assisting French people in relocating to Britain (OC ZoomInfo, 2008). It is not surprising in light of these

CHAPTER 2

28

examples, that in 2000, France recorded the highest administrative regulation and second highest barriers to entrepreneurship out of most of the OECD countries (Nicoletti, Scarpetta, & Boylaud, 2000). More recent reports suggest that France has made progress in this area but entrepreneurs continue to leave. 2) I have already stated that the French public largely believes that globalisation is a major threat to their national and cultural identity. The major reasons for this relate to the global free trade movement and the dissemination of new technology that are making countries more susceptible to foreign cultural influences. French cultural pride and their ‘Frenchness’ is indisputable but their cultural exception has led them to resist external influences, particularly from the US. Further, they recognise, like most nations, that English is the ‘language of globalisation’ which constitutes a further threat to their identity (Bennhold, 2007b). However, globalisation (especially the rapid dissemination of the Internet and other communication technologies, the dominant role of the US in world affairs, the ever-increasing hegemony of English language in global business, and the liberalisation of agricultural trade, intellectual property and services) has witnessed the vigorous re-emergence of French nationalism. This constituted a new reason to fear for their cultural, linguistic and culinary traditions (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). The French fail to realise that globalisation is also the vehicle for the dissemination of their cultural traditions, their identity and distinctiveness, especially through the Internet that they did not embrace initially. Contributing to the debate on globalisation, several participants of my inquiry worry that globalisation will create even more disparity between first world and developing countries because rich countries have the means to send their personnel abroad whilst the poorer nations are excluded from such opportunities. One of my French national participants, Nicole, a young graduate aged twenty-five and holding a bac+5, fears: ’les pays pauvres vont rester à un niveau très local, très fermés et ils vont être dans une sphère en dehors de la mondialisation car ils n’auront pas les moyens de s’y intéresser ou investir.’ (Nicole, April, 2008). (The poorer countries will function at a very local level, closed to the world where they remain in a bubble outside globalisation because they won’t have the means to participate internationally or to invest). On the question of decentralisation, Nicole chastises the superior stance taken by the French on this issue: ‘Comme on dit, les Français ne veulent pas se salir les mains; ils ne veulent pas faire les petits boulots. Alors, laissons les Chinois les faire! S’ils veulent le faire, pourquoi pas s’organiser pour envoyer des équipes en Chine. Pourquoi pas? Si le français est manager et il n’a pas envie de coudre.’ (As they say, the French don’t want to get their hands dirty; they don’t want to do the menial jobs. So, let the Chinese do them! If they want to do these jobs, why not organise to send teams to China? Why not? If the French guy is a manager and doesn’t want to sew). Nicole argues that now with the increase in products Made in China on the market, products manufactured in France have become more exclusive. She cites the example of perfumes imported from China and sold at six Euros in supermarkets that are discarded by large sectors of the public even if those made in France cost fifty Euros in perfume stores. The value of the product immediately increases and Made


29

in France becomes more prestigious. ‘Ce sera un peu comme le luxe, plus c’est rare, plus c’est cher et plus ça prend de la valeur et plus on se vante de l’avoir.’ (Nicole, April, 2008). (It will become a luxury item, the rarer it is, the more expensive it is, the more it increases in value, the more people boast about owning it). 3) Gordon and Meunier (2001) argue the very nature of globalisation defies some of the fundamental values upon which the French Republic was constructed. Globalisation is an intrinsically disorganised process that greatly diminishes the role of the State and creates both huge successes and inequalities concurrently. Given that the French Republic was founded under the motto of liberté, égalité, fraternité and is based, in theory, on the premise of rationality, (that is, an enlightened State working towards the enhancement of the collective destiny of its people), it is not surprising that the French are ill at ease with a process that directly challenges the pillars upon which their Republic was built. 4) Globalisation is perceived as a threat to France’s global prominence. As a country in its own right, France has long been a powerful player on the world stage, a role it has been very proud of. Globalisation signifies relinquishing part of this power to collective organisations such as the United Nations and the European Union, which again is not easy to accept (Ibid.). Is this fear in fact legitimate? Gordon (2004) argues that European countries face more significant risks from globalisation than nations such as the US, as a result of higher levels of State spending. 5) Finally, the argument that many French people resist globalisation because they can afford to do so was perhaps not unqualified at the beginning of this century but times have changed. The reason for this argument is that the UK and the US both turned to more liberal economic policies in the late 1970s and early 1980s thanks to their perception that their economic performance had declined so severely that major structural changes were required in order to address the problem. However, in spite of France’s problems with inflation and unemployment, the French have continued to appreciate a high quality of life, continued to depend on the State for direction, dismissing signs of an ailing economy. Therefore they could not envisage undertaking a total overhaul of their economic system. In other words, the French do not feel that their economy is broken enough to require fixing (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). To place this situation in perspective, this was the outlook for 2001. Can the French still afford to openly oppose globalisation now that the world is privy to the stealthy adoption of its rewards?

ACADEMIC MOBILITY

This inquiry revealed an overwhelming support for globalisation where academic mobility is in question. As a result of the iterative process employed to collect and analyse data, no new information was produced on this issue, confirming that in this qualitative project, saturation was achieved. Responses from both the national and expatriate studies provide evidence to research findings on the undisputed

CHAPTER 2

30

value and benefits of international border crossing ventures but there remains a large sector of society, the older generation mostly, that has not embraced youth mobility. My current and previous research has found them to be timid travellers (Patron, 2007, 2009). As young French people defy these trends their families have no choice but to accept their decisions, the Internet and Americanisation being targeted as the usual culprits. The following extracts from both sets of data endorse study abroad programmes and internships for their obvious advantages but also reveal a high level of criticism aimed at the government for their unsatisfactory educational policies that fail to encourage and support academic mobility. Their views have been included here and translated where necessary, as articulate examples of the rich text data that was obtained from the interviewing process. Several participants of my inquiry believe that this feature of French education should be a mandatory component of the programme. For example, Arlette, who is a member of the cohort of French nationals, says that even English degree structures in France do not have the compulsory year in an Anglo-Saxon country. She finds this absurd:

Moi, je trouve que ça c’est quelque chose d’aberrant! C’est important de s’inspirer de la façon dont les autres pays fonctionnent … on a une ouverture d’esprit, on est plus tolérant. Il faut avoir une autre perspective. On dit que parce que les gens font les choses différemment que c’est forcément mauvais. Il faut qu’on soit ouvert au changement … (Arlette, April, 2008). I find this absurd! It’s important to become inspired by the way other countries function … one becomes open-minded and more tolerant. You have to gain a different perspective on things. They say that because people do things in a different way that this is bad. One needs to be open to change.

Arlette’s views on this subject represent a consensus of interpretations gathered and overall they offer clear indictment of the insular attitudes of many French people who have never ventured far from their villages. In the opinion of the enlightened few with intercultural experience, French education is in dire need of reforms that target the need for international programmes fostering understanding and tolerance of other cultures. Until recently, it is only the Business schools of tertiary establishments that have encouraged exchange programmes further afield as part of their curricula. ERASMUS programmes have largely focused on the European precinct since the eighties. A thirty-two year old polyglot who is part of the national group in my study is Brigitte. Employed in a French university in International Relations, with her French, German, English, Danish and Portuguese, she is well-placed to inform ERASMUS students on their outgoing exchanges. Contrary to public opinion, Brigitte perceives the prospects of academic sojourners who return to France to pursue further studies or who embark on their career as positive. ‘Something that I find very important with regard to academic mobility is that I see it as a social ladder. This is quite apparent.’ (Brigitte, April, 2008). Brigitte is able to witness the transition to employment of some students because of her job description but this is contrary to research findings on the subject (Patron, 2007). She suggests that


31

the intercultural experience plays an important role in securing better jobs post-sojourn in France because ‘if they had stayed in France, they would never have had the same opportunities. They may have stopped their studies to find work at the lower echelons of a company. After their exchange they usually continue to study, they have wings, they discover new things. The world is open and it is possible to do many things’ (Brigitte, April, 2008). If this is the scenario in some companies in France, it is refreshing to witness that change is taking place. On the other hand, my data suggest that very few individuals fall into this category, the majority struggling to find work in spite of their intercultural experience and high qualifications. Brigitte’s own battles for promotion after her exchanges belie this meritocratic process. Her case will be investigated in subsequent chapters. In these times where precarious employment prevails, youth unemployment wavers around 25%. Therefore, the young graduates race to accumulate higher degrees in the hope that the employment situation will hold more promise but their fields remain largely saturated and the labour market inflexible. A number of participants of this inquiry point the finger of blame directly at French governments, be they Left or Right-winged, for their lack of support for academic mobility. For example, Alain, who is a twenty-four year old student in France, suggests:‘La mobilité des jeunes Français n’est pas facilitée par le gouvernement (qu’il soit de gauche ou de droite). Il ne nous est pas aisé de partir étudier à l’étranger afin de nous ouvrir sur d’autres cultures, aussi bien sociales que professionnelles ou encore universitaires.’ (Alain, April, 2009). (French academic mobility is not facilitated by the government, left or right-winged. It’s not easy for us to study abroad so that we may open up to other cultures, social as well as professional or even academic). It would not be illogical to perceive this strategic measure as protectionist of French language and culture, an efficient way of fighting against the hegemony of English perhaps. This indictment of government administrations in their educational and intercultural policies is but the tip of the iceberg if this study is anything to go by. The views proffered by Alain resonate with the majority of participants in this study as they consider themselves fortunate to have been able to participate in cultural exchanges thanks to financial support from their middle class families for some or for others, scholarships and loans that have afforded them the opportunity. Danielle carried out research on academic mobility and student dissatisfaction upon their return and her astonishment was immense when she considered the responses of professors who declared that they were against exchange programmes because to them: ‘studying abroad for one or two terms simply meant a less valued diploma that stained the university reputation of excellence!’ (Danielle, April, 2008). Is it surprising that she has had difficulty in publishing her research? Further censure of the government’s lack of support for academic mobility was evident in the data. It has taken Roselyne, a twenty-eight year old bac+5 graduate in the national cohort of this inquiry, five years to finally secure a position as social worker for the physically challenged. She compares the French predicament with the facility for young Australians to experience intercultural travel. Many enjoy a Gap year prior to commencing their tertiary education or participate in other

CHAPTER 2

32

exchange programmes during their studies. She outlines the problem:‘Nous c’est pas possible car, vue la conjoncture économique, nous, si on a un trou de un an ou deux dans le CV il va falloir s’expliquer. On peut mettre qu’il y a eu un an à l’étranger et cela peut être bien, mais bon! … et puis c’est très difficile de se remettre aux études pour compléter les cinq ans.’ (Roselyne, April, 2009). (For us, it’s not possible because of the economic situation, because for us, if we have a one or two year gap on our CV, we will need to explain this. We can put down a year abroad and this could be a good thing but then again! … and then it’s not easy to resume your studies to complete the five years). Roselyne explains that the fierce competition for employment in one’s field of studies coupled with the length of the programmes in France is another factor that discourages exchanges for French students. The longer they stay out of the workforce the harder it is for them to find work and secure a permanent contract. An intelligible comment is included here from Robert, who is a French national academic participating in my inquiry. He strives to prepare his Ph.D. candidates for an international future and focuses on measures that address the shortcomings of French education. His personal experience exemplifies the type of curriculum he believes French universities should endorse if they wish to compete in a global village. He maintains that this feature of tertiary best practice should be engineered to reflect an international perspective, with universities focused on establishing a global and seamless system of recognition of degrees that will encourage academic mobility. This in fact is what the Bologna Process has been attempting to implement over the last five years but some French universities among others in Europe and internationally have been recalcitrant in their compliance, procrastinating until obliged to convert to a system of Bachelor, Masters and Ph.D. It appears government administrations have their timetable and tertiary institutions have theirs. The resistance from French academics is significant and has manifested in strike action on numerous occasions. Robert explains:

My feeling is that what concerns the French system is, this isn’t working well. I think in any case every student should go and study in a foreign country. It takes ten years for people to speak a small sentence in English, which is terrible. I mean I see my Ph.D. students and most of them even if they are able to read English, they don’t speak properly, they don’t have the ability to be fluent. In communications for instance we have international meetings where you have to talk in English. It is difficult sometimes. They are writing their Ph.D. in French but I expect them to write at least a part of it in English … There is a contradictory situation in France where you have to teach in French and where everything should be French but on the other hand your scientific publications should be in international journals and they are all in English. So I tell my students that if they want to have a job they need to have as many publications as possible in international journals, which are in English. So I suggest that you write your Ph.D.… your thesis… whatever introductory part in French but then you put your publications inside in English (Robert, April 2008).


33

Robert is clearly dissatisfied with the educational system in France and tries in his own way to generate changes in methodology in his field. It is quite surprising but logical nonetheless that the thesis is actually allowed to contain sections in English given the parameters of the Ph.D. requirements in the Sciences: ‘The international standard of performance is the International English Certification’ according to Robert (cf. Truchot, 2002). He is in a unique position in France as he delivers his lectures in English. He proudly claims that most of his colleagues are incapable of matching his ability. When I applauded this practice, Robert’s response was revealing: ‘As a human being, I expect to be unique!’ His regret is his inability to also utilise the German he had acquired at university. Fraser (2008) highlights the failure of the French president to instigate changes that he pledged prior to his election in 2007. He states the purchasing power indicating slight improvement has in fact marginally declined thanks to rising inflation and adds: ‘plans for public sector job cuts, other alterations to public services, changes to pensions and privatisation plans have sparked an outbreak of strike action by among others, secondary school students, transport workers and dock-workers’ (Ibid.). Whilst there has been some flexibility in the labour market, dramatic measures still need to be taken to remedy the economic situation. It is anyone’s guess whether Sarkozy will persevere with his ambitious plans for reforms in the various sectors because gauging by the efforts of his predecessors, when it comes to the moment of truth, strike action and violent protests bring the nation to a standstill and prevent reforms from taking place (Ibid.). The French revolutionary spirit is a force to be reckoned with and if the President believes that French people need to work harder and longer than their thirty-five hour week, the public is not ready to relinquish the advantages that signify an extra burden for some. In her interview, Danielle explains that the philosophy behind this radical policy created twelve years ago, which was to create jobs and afford workers more leisure time was also to share the labour market so that everyone could have work. Unfortunately she believes, for many small businesses, new jobs were never created because of the onerous costs of hiring. What effectively transpired was: ‘the amount of work was distributed among the existing teams, hence increasing work productivity per working person and more stress at work. Nobody in France would use the term ‘comfortable’ to describe the thirty-five hour week, as is commonly thought abroad’ (Danielle, April, 2008). Views concerning academic mobility and the outcome of studies generated interesting arguments in this study. Serge, a twenty-four year old student is among the cohort of French national students in this inquiry who will graduate with a bac+8 years before embarking on the Ph.D. thesis component in Warsaw and Slovakia, adding two more years to his intercultural legal repertoire. The way Serge perceives the employment scene, if more students were to give serious thought to the outcome of their studies, they would not be in this predicament today. This view is substantiated by wider literature on the subject (Doland, 2010; Steinberg, 2010). Whilst in favour of academic mobility in France, Serge is among the few in this study who are not convinced that the phenomenon is taking firm hold in his country. He describes the French as casaniers, unadventurous,

CHAPTER 2

34

confirming the commonly held view of the timid French traveller. His justification of this interpretation is worthy of consideration as it reinforces the insular attitudes of many members of French society. He believes that those who go abroad for extended exchanges remain in the minority. He advocates increased mobility so that French people can become more open-minded and hopefully stop complaining about their lot in life when they discover how privileged they are in comparison with so many other cultures. From Serge’s observation, when the French travel, albeit more specifically for their holidays, they go to destinations where they are totally in control, exporting in the process the French model instead of experiencing the local model. This, he says, is obvious by their behaviour in many instances. The traditional stereotype of the arrogant French traveller is clearly pertinent to this comment. He argues:

Au moins dans leurs esprits même s’ils ne partent que pour deux semaines de tourisme ils se comporteront de la sorte. Ils ne comprendront pas par exemple que la personne dans l’hôtel ne parle pas parfaitement Français alors que eux ne parlent pas un mot d’Anglais et qu’ils sont en Angleterre. C’est un exemple mais quand je parle de terrain conquis c’est cette idée là. Pour les gens qui partent vraiment avec l’idée d’aller pendant un an ou plus, il y a cette ouverture culturelle mais ça reste une minorité à mon avis (Serge, April, 2009). At least in their minds if they only go for two weeks of holidays they will behave this way. They won’t understand for example that the hotel staff member doesn’t speak perfect French whereas they themselves don’t speak a word of English and they are in England. It’s an example but when I speak of ‘conquered territory’ that’s the idea. For those who go away for extended periods of a year or more, there’s an open-mindedness but this concerns the minority in my opinion.

Serge’s arguments on the subject are comprehensive and they have been included in this chapter for their coherence and their relevance to the discussions presented. His views are distinct from those of other French national participants, Alain for one, who argues that the government does not facilitate exchanges. This supports his previous statements about the insularity of the French by claiming that students do not take advantage of the financial support offered to them in universities. It is not surprising however, that options to study in Poland or other eastern European countries should be less alluring for students who compete furiously for the UK where the only criterion appears to be proficiency in English. Demand is growing exponentially for that region. Serge explains the ease with which he, not even a language student, obtained the scholarship for his studies in Poland.

Moi pour partir en Pologne, ma bourse d’études et de recherche, mon dossier était une formalité. On m’a dit qu’ils manquaient de candidats … mais personne n’était intéressé. Alors le Royaume-Uni est en général en ‘sur-booking’ mais les autres pays Européens moins. Les gens n’en profitent pas vraiment. La langue n’est pas un problème si ce n’est qu’il faut parler anglais pour pouvoir partir. J’étais la seule personne qui ne faisait pas des langues,


35

qui était intéressé par ce séjour et ils me l’ont donné comme ça. (Serge, April, 2009). For me to go to Poland, my student and research scholarship, my file was a formality. They said they were short of candidates … but no one was interested. So the UK is generally over-subscribed but the other European countries much less. People don’t really take advantage of this. The language isn’t a problem as you only need English to succeed. I was the only person not in languages interested in this option and they gave it to me easily.

Serge admits that the Polish, who have considerably less favourable living conditions to the French, are seasoned travellers. This is hardly unexpected. The fact that he lived the lifestyle of a wealthy individual in Poland thanks to the exchange rate and his scholarship, evidently influenced his opinion as Serge had effectively managed to climb the social ladder over several generations, and not only in Poland. His grandparents’ humble beginnings as mine workers progressed with his mother’s improved standing in society through her vocation as a teacher and thanks to her sacrifices that ensured the best possible education for her children, Serge now has his sights on a tenured career as university Professor or a European Fiscal lawyer, leaving his options opened. These prospects place him comfortably in the echelons of the upper-middle class where he at least should reap the economic rewards commensurate with his level of expertise. Until such times however, his current situation as a student propels him back to the unenviable status of ‘intellectual underclass’ along with his cohort of French students and graduates for, in spite of being engaged, he has been forced to move back home because of his pecuniary student’s status. Serge’s case will be further investigated in Chapter 4 for the insights that his views provide for this book. On a much more positive note, Danielle articulates the intrinsic worth of academic mobility for all nations particularly for its dismantling of individual borders where education is the focus as this allows for the exchange of ideas without the loss of cultural identity. As Danielle is a specialist on intercultural issues, she bases her explanation on the literature of the subject, asserting that contrary to this fear, during intercultural encounters, the identity of sojourners is placed in relief with others enabling them to negotiate new identities that do not undermine or conflict with the original. This is because the two identities are not mutually exclusive as their status is represented on different societal levels (See also Byram, 1999). Danielle does not classify the mingling of cultures as a loss of one’s identity or culture but rather a gain especially benefiting young people. She concludes with a valid argument saying that individuals model themselves according to these encounters. Danielle therefore advocates youth mobility promoting that this feature of French education be further encouraged because everyone lives in his or her own frame of reference. She says that until they have the opportunity to face other challenges, French people do not know what is outside France and they do not realise that they are duplicating constraining patterns.

CHAPTER 2

36

BRAIN DRAIN

Academic mobility is not a new phenomenon as this practice has been established in many cultures for decades and indeed centuries, although in far smaller numbers. Students and researchers go abroad for diverse experiences, for economic and personal enrichment, for intellectual opportunities, to improve their linguistic and intercultural competence. Their career perspectives should consequently be brighter if and when they return home. Unfortunately, far more rewarding employment opportunities are often presented to sojourners overseas as students compare the favourable economic and social situations of the host country with the somewhat lacklustre profile of their homeland. Ultimately it is the devaluation of their cultural and intercultural capital that prompts many academic sojourners to shun their country of origin, forcing them to leave family and friends to settle abroad. As notions of brain drain are intrinsically tied to globalisation and this issue is an integral part of this book, it is opportune to define the term and to juxtapose it with other concepts that are of relevance to this book. This is not a simple task as the intricacies of the term dating back to the 1950s suggest that there is not a unique definition of the brain drain and that this is a wide and complex phenomenon (Giannoccolo, 2009). The term has been employed by migration scholars for decades to refer to ‘the permanent exit of skilled and professional workers from one country to another’ (Liki, 2001). It was the British Royal Society that first coined the phrase brain drain to describe the outflow of scientists and technologists to the US and Canada in the 1950s and 1960s (Cervantes & Guellec, 2002). This fact actually dispelled the myth that the problem only affected developing and transition economies, underprivileged countries where academic sojourners and graduates relocated abroad temporarily or even permanently to industrialised nations. As a result of globalisation, skilled migration between OECD countries was on the rise in the 1990s but this was thought to represent temporary flows between advanced economies where emigration of medical and engineering personnel, entrepreneurs, executives and young researchers and academics, IT specialists and managers contributed to brain circulation rather than brain drain. The reality is that today, these talented young individuals continue to leave familiar shores for greener pastures and in far greater numbers thanks to the ease of international mobility. Formerly, the emigrants from under-privileged countries were naturally instrumentally motivated, seeking to embrace new educational, economic or intellectual opportunities. However, the move was sometimes provoked by war, political, ethnic and religious persecution (Cervantes & Guellec, 2002). The generosity of benefactors or governments that also sponsored the studies and sojourns of the recipients played a significant role in the increasing brain drain. The resulting scenario often translated into negative outcomes for the source countries that waited in vain for the return of these talented individuals who opted to emigrate definitively. The tacit understanding in many cases was that the young foreign graduates would return home to become proactive members of their home


37

societies upon completion of their studies in order to afford their country the injection of enthusiasm and increased knowledge, accumulated skills and networks they so badly needed. On the other hand their decision to emigrate permanently was not always without justification. Higher incomes abroad were a resounding argument for many foreign graduates to remain in the first world country. Far more convincingly, their reluctance to go home was founded on the premise that these highly-skilled migrants feared the loss of the cultural, scientific or entrepreneurial ambience required to maintain and enhance their skills base. Further, the bureaucracy in their homeland and restrictions on visa applications threatened to bring their exchange of knowledge to an abrupt halt. Recently however, reverse flows of skills and knowledge as well as money being sent home has been considered as a situation of brain circulation (Parthasarathi, 2003–2004). The concept of brain drain can be construed as brain gain or brain circulation by receiving countries if educated and talented immigrants are allowed to settle permanently or to move freely between the country of origin and the adopted country. However, this scenario is complex and at times fraught with administrative and immigration constraints. Brain drain can also be conceptualised as brain gain if expatriates return home after decades abroad to become proactive individuals in their forties or fifties for example but this eventuality is becoming increasingly scarce as those who have acquired their degrees abroad may find their qualifications unrecognised and social mobility blocked. The likely scenario is that the home country is more often deprived of the experience, education and networks that the emigrants have acquired abroad as they find it difficult in many instances to return home. If they do, they will expect remuneration proportionate to their qualifications and experience, promotion to the higher echelons of the company and a reasonable tax rate. If countries of high expatriation rates do not address this issue rapidly by changing the regulations and tax policies that affect employment, the political and economic consequences of this increased mobility are predicted to be profound (See also Applebaum, 2007). Brain gain can be also construed as a country benefiting from the international movement of skilled workers which tends to offset the emigration of talented individuals from the home country. The question is whether the loss of a nation’s brightest citizens can be offset by the immigration of these skilled foreigners who obtain ‘migrant’ status. Accurate statistics are necessary but not easily obtained in order to determine whether the situation is in fact brain drain or brain gain. In theory, the source countries stand to benefit to some degree from the sometimes generous amounts of money sent home by expatriates, temporary or permanent, to their families but some would argue that being deprived of the savoir-faire of these educated individuals far outweighs the financial contributions they make. In the 1960s and 1970s, the reality was that this essentially translated into a situation of brain drain for the home nation as the acquired knowledge and technological training of the graduates would hold far greater benefits when implemented in their homeland if they returned. Important roles in the country’s advanced research and development sectors awaited returning emigrants in some cases creating a situation where ‘the pre-existence of considerable ‘absorptive capacity’ appears to be a

CHAPTER 2

38

necessary condition for significant reverse migration ... but trends indicate that most brain ‘circulation’ is highly asymmetric’ (Parthasarathi, 2003–2004). A possible solution to this problem that could foster a situation of brain recirculation would entail the host government issuing the foreign graduates, particularly scientists and other skilled individuals with ‘permanent visas.’ This in turn allows for voluntary ‘recirculation’ at the discretion of each individual as to the time and length of each transition (Ibid). Conversely, issuing permanent visas could create a desire for permanent residence or citizenship in certain host countries with a flow of remaining family members adding to immigration woes of that country. What can incontrovertibly be construed as brain gain for the host country and highly beneficial is the nature of the exchange itself between the foreign students or scientists and their fellow scientists or academics that often produce ground-breaking research in the fields of medicine, other sciences or engineering. The interactions result in culture gain, greater intercultural awareness, tolerance and open-mindedness for the individuals concerned on both sides of the equation. In the context of this book, we are largely concerned with the factors provoking French brain drain. The findings of this inquiry suggest that the increasing exodus of young educated French individuals to more welcoming countries is first and foremost instrumentally motivated, culturally and linguistically. It is however disquieting to observe that their flight can also be attributed to increasing internal conflict resulting from a lack of opportunity, or more appropriately, precarious employment conditions, intergenerational inequalities between the Baby Boomer and subsequent generations, and political instability arising from the dissatisfaction of diverse sectors of the population on numerous social issues. Integration problems from increasing immigration, a rigid class system and a disappearing social ladder, crippling taxes, and inflexibility of government policies in the field of education are equally contributing factors to this new phenomenon. (See also DFAE, 2008). These issues, and in particular matters associated with cultural capital will be discussed in the context of the appropriate chapters and the arguments substantiated by grass root research and data from numerous sources. It is necessary to examine the factors that have impacted on the decision of young and mid-career French graduates to emigrate from their homeland. It is curious to note that three quarters of young French people believe that they will have an inferior lifestyle to that of their parents. They cannot understand how one can expect a society to be dynamic, entrepreneurial and optimistic when the future looks increasingly bleak (Ash, 2007; Chauvel, 2006a). The unqualified youth and some with minimal qualifications naturally believe that those who have graduated with several degrees and have secured a position will fare far better than the masses of unemployed youth because even if they do not have a job, they have the possibility of expatriating. This scenario is not exclusive to France as many nations face similar problems. However, graduates from many countries are heading abroad in the hope of establishing an enriching life and a meaningful career for themselves, sometimes unaware that the targeted country may be experiencing similar problems to their homeland. In France at least, the social problems


39

graduates leave behind represent a far more pessimistic outlook than for many of her neighbours. The reality France and other European nations face with this situation of brain drain is that the number of exiles is no longer restricted to scientific post-doctoral researchers or engineers, but increasingly ordinary French and European people with experience in business but with fewer degrees. Their ages are not restricted to the twenty year olds either as more and more people between twenty and forty, disgruntled with the economic, political and social problems opt to try their luck abroad. To place this situation in perspective, French youth are actually among the least optimistic about their career prospects according to an OECD (2009b) publication. In an interesting magazine article interviewing academic sojourners in Paris Match, Delassus accentuated this increasing flight of young graduates in a provocative piece entitled: Jeunes diplômés: La France? Non merci! (Young graduates: France? No thank you!) (Delassus, 2010–2011). The author explains that thanks to globalisation and increased academic mobility and Cédric Klapish’s film L’Auberge Espagnole, (The Spanish Apartment), the Erasmus student exchange programme initiated in 1987 in all universities has propelled this new generation of French students not only to study outside France for a year, but for many of the 28,000 enrolled, this first year triggered enhanced travel. France’s participation in this programme was actually the greatest in Europe in 2007, with an 8.7% increase registered in 2009. Delassus (2010–2011) reinforces discoveries from my current and former research (Patron, 2007) when she asserts that many graduates have decided that they prefer to establish their professional career and family life abroad post-Erasmus. It appears they are seeking in far-away places what is missing at home: the discovery of other cultures, a milder climate, and a more ambitious professional career. Individuals cite French bureaucracy, the elitist educational system, precarious employment conditions, unaffordable accommodation and insularity, among other factors that have provoked this brain drain, supporting the findings presented in my current inquiry. Delassus (2010–2011) reports they do not miss France. They are attached to their homeland but they reproach France her banality, her grey skies and steep cost of living. France’s art de vivre, her gastronomy, her language, her universities … and her Sécu, the social safety net are not enough to hold back her children. Criticism of government policies regarding the educational system and academic mobility was a recurring feature of this inquiry. For example, Marc, a bac+5, is a freelance consultant academic with opportunities in both the private and public university sector but his unique position and his polyglot status also afford him the luxury of utilising his skills in intercultural management in international firms in France. Eclectic in his talents, a linguist originally, Marc has chosen to diversify his fields of expertise and plans to embark on his Ph.D. outside of France because he finds possibilities in his homeland ‘too restraining intellectually.’ With the CAPES, Certificat d’Aptitudes au Professorat de l’Enseignement, (the university qualification for teachers), ‘all you can do is teach’ Marc declares. ‘Now I can do whatever I want!’(Marc, April, 2008). Marc’s criticism of government policies regarding the educational system and academic

CHAPTER 2

40

mobility of French youth is rooted in his belief that insufficient progress is being made in this area because it is too political. He argues he and his colleagues are doing their best to implement changes to the system but the bureaucracy is just too challenging. ‘When I come here (to a public university where he teaches) and I ask for something, I need to wait six months for an answer! Forget it! I go somewhere else.’ (Marc, April, 2008). Before the GFC forced many global expatriates to return home temporarily, London became France’s sixth largest city after Nice, dubbed by many as ‘a meritocratic Eldorado’ (Samuel, 2008). What has happened to the meritocratic republic of yore? 10–15,000 people continue the exodus from France each year and although taxes have been lowered to some extent, insufficient measures have been put in place to arrest this outward flow. Ironically, whist the French and other Europeans arrive in droves on British shores, Britain’s academic underclass plans its exodus to the US. On a brighter note, however, these European contingents, experiencing fewer immigration constraints, are essentially contributing to the brain gain for Britain. The precarious employment of the British expatriates mirrors the situation in France as their cultural capital is also perceived as devalued in their own country. As the prospect of career advancement is minimal, this de-motivation propels them to move to countries with more lucrative job prospects (Bonelli, 2006). Governments may well believe that the increased mobility of youth across borders in search of a better life elsewhere signifies a cohort of capricious individuals, an entitled generation perhaps that cannot find satisfaction in their homeland. The fact remains that globalisation has paved the way for many nations’ brightest to leave familiar shores and rewarding alternatives need to be found to entice them back to their countries of origin once more. As proactive individuals they could employ the wealth of their intercultural competencies for the good of their country. A journalist commented that ‘almost by accident, the European Union may have created a new kind of European citizen instead: mobile, English-speaking, Internet-using ... willing to live pretty much anywhere’ (Applebaum, 2007 p. 1). If a situation of brain circulation were in fact the scenario in most cases, the effects of brain drain would not be an issue! Academic mobility is on the increase globally but nowhere more dramatically marked than in the case of French post-doctoral researchers who consider that their cultural and intercultural capital is unacceptably undervalued. A prime example of this involves the growing number of these researchers that have headed to the US and other western nations where it is suggested that, in terms of social status, recognition and personal accomplishment, researchers are far more valued overseas. In the US particularly, salaries are deemed commensurate with education, expertise and talent. An expatriate participant of this inquity, currently working in Canberra, Australia, Céline obtained her Ph.D. in the area of Neuroethology, specialising in the study of insect behaviours and the neurobiological bases of their behaviour. Her struggles began at the end of her Masters programme when Céline was unable to secure Ph.D. possibilities with a scholarship in France. She was accepted in Germany but then the problems were repeated when she tried to find a post-doctoral position in her field. As her contract


41

drew to an end in Canberra in 2010, her desire to undertake her second post-doctoral opportunity in France resulted in disappointment because no one was willing to fund her research. She concludes: ‘Finally, one of the labs I visited in the US at the end of my Ph.D. just offered me a post-doc position to start next year. I consider myself quite lucky, although all the gaps between positions were quite difficult to handle emotionally’ (Céline, November, 2010). In one of numerous blogs posted on the Internet, Matthieu argues Ph.D. theses are less valued by French companies; they are often considered as backward students unless the engineering graduate for instance, is hired to work in Research and Development. In France, Ph.D. students are seen as incapable of adapting to the real world, are less accepted socially and the only fields open to them are in teaching or researching. Unlike the confined departments where researchers work in French universities, US Faculties are multi-disciplinary, much more open and they offer many more advantages for creativity (Matthieu, 2006). With the increasing number of testimonials recorded on the Internet depicting such stories, it is not surprising that the exodus is heightened towards America. Findings from a survey carried out by P.E.C.R.E.S. (Pour L’Etude des Conditions de travail dans la Recherche et L’Enseignement Supérieur) were published in a book entitled Recherche Précarisé, Recherche Atomisé (Precarious and Fragmented Research) (P.E.C.R.E.S., 2011b) to expose working conditions of researchers and academics in the tertiary sector. A subsequent blog dedicated to the testimonials of many long suffering individuals working in this area has uncovered the deplorable condition of post-doctoral researchers among others who have endured years of precarious and allegedly illegal employment conditions but who have until now remained silent. The name of this group alludes to the former Education Minister, Valérie Pécresse who is responsible for the reforms of the status of researchers in the tertiary sector (For further information see P.E.C.R.E.S., 2011a). Empathy for this group has also emerged from many participants of my research although they themselves are not in this category. As immigration protocols proved impossible for one of my French national participants, Camille, to stay in Australia, she was forced to return to France temporarily to complete her Masters degree in education. This was a stepping stone for her to pursue a career abroad in foreign language teaching. Her criticism of the educational system in France goes beyond her own field. She suggests many people left France because they had no choice. After extensive intercultural experiences and enormous effort one should expect to be properly remunerated in a rewarding job in their field of studies but instead they remain unemployed. She cites the case of researchers, her friend among them, post-doctoral investigators carrying out scientific research who experience frustration with their working conditions and who receive little recognition.

C’est l’exemple typique des gens qui travaillent dans la recherche en France. Ils n’ont aucune reconnaissance … et quand on voit qu’ils galèrent à trouver un travail, et quand ils arrivent à en trouver, c’est quand même un travail énorme. C’est un beau travail et quand on voit qu’ils sont à six dans un petit

CHAPTER 2

42

local comme ça! En Angleterre on va faire tout ce qu’il faut pour que la recherche avance. On leur donne des locaux, de la reconnaissance, des budgets. En France ils ont rien, ni reconnaissance, ni local, ni emploi, ni rien … Et on leur donne jamais de crédit, pour avoir découvert quelque chose, pour avoir fait quelque chose de bien ... Donc il y a de moins en moins de personnes qui font des recherches. La plupart sont partis en Angleterre. C’est à côté, ou aux USA, mais c’est normal dans ces moments-là je pense qu’on n’a pas le choix, on y va … s’ils avaient eu la possibilité d’avoir cette situation-là en France peut-être qu’ils reviendraient (Camille, July, 2008). It’s the typical example of people who work in research in France. They get no recognition … and when you see how hard it is for them to find work and when they manage to find one, it’s a big job. It’s great work and when you see six of them crammed in a small space! … In England everything is done to advance research. They are given work space, recognition, budgets. In France, they have nothing, no recognition, no work, nothing … and they are never given credit for having discovered something, for having done something worthwhile … So, there are fewer people involved in research. The majority have gone to the UK. It’s next door or the US, but it’s normal in these circumstances because we have no choice, we leave … if they had the same opportunity in France perhaps they would return.

It is nevertheless, quite plausible that some countries, such as Australia and Canada may experience a balance between professional workers emigrating to foreign shores such as the US offering a more competitive advantage, and the constant inflow of skilled and educated migrants and students. Proponents of the notion of brain drain state that a shortage of funding for research is fuelling the alleged exodus in Australia. On the other hand, Australia has been known as the lucky country for decades, so it is not surprising that with a historical link to Britain and other European countries, that young Australians should venture abroad for several years to visit the homeland of their forebears, but the majority returns to settle down when they are ready. Many migrants have benefited from excellent educational opportunities and rewarding careers. Dobson, Birrell et al. (2005) question the claims of brain drain in Australia and some European countries such as Germany and France because of a lack of data to support the allegations. They argue that such countries are experiencing in fact a brain gain because of the number of science students being recruited from countries shortly to become members of the European Union. They also claim that in Germany at least, many expatriate scientists are returning home, boosting the contingent of educated professionals. Research shows that this is not the case for France as Germany is not experiencing the same political and social turmoil. Further, perhaps the professionals are not arriving in significant enough numbers to replace those leaving. Many educators, economists and entrepreneurs are forecasting the permanent exodus of French professionals. Although qualitative, my study on the increasing numbers of graduates expatriating from France aims to elucidate discussion on opponents and proponents of the argument on French brain drain. Dobson et al. argue that for Australia as well as other countries, the professional


43

high flying expatriates often represent a brain gain for the home nation as they have become important players in business and civic endeavours abroad. In essence they correspond to a valuable resource (Dobson, et al., 2005). There seems to be no such development in France concerning the expatriates who are comfortably ensconced in satisfying careers overseas. Despite issues related to the increase of international mobility of highly-qualified workers finally gaining the attention of policy-makers globally, the quality and comparability of international data on migration have been unable to keep pace, according to the OECD (2005b). Another reason for the difficulty in estimating actual numbers of emigrants is that employment for those residing in Britain and other EU countries is unimpeded by bureaucracy and statistics are hard to obtain. In the US sponsors are needed for foreign workers and visas are an added burden. For example, the Foreign Ministry estimated in 2004 that the number of French citizens living abroad, most of them young and well-educated had risen dramatically by almost 30% since 1992, from approximately 1.6 million to 2.2 million (Rohan, 2006). Irrespective of the status of the exiles, the young and increasingly the not so young talented individuals contemplate a career move to predominantly Anglo-Saxon and to Asian countries as they face increasing unemployment and a threat of revolution.

THE GLOBALISATION DEBATE

Whilst it is no surprise that the findings of this inquiry were overwhelmingly positive on the subject of academic mobility, the consensus of opinions from both sections of this investigation, nationals and expatriates alike reflected negative views on the subject of economic globalisation, concurring with general public sentiment. Some of the most convincing arguments from the participants have been included here to illustrate their views on the subject. Some respondents from the contingent of younger graduates, ranging from twenty-one to thirty-three years were in general a little more accepting of economic globalisation, possibly because they had limited experience in the workforce and were not sufficiently informed to articulate their views on the subject. More to the point, their intercultural experiences have broadened their perspectives and increased their willingness to accept unavoidable change. This comprises the Internet savvy generation who have embraced mobility with open arms for all the cultural enrichment that intercultural travel promises. During the last two decades, substantive writings, if largely polemic, on the subject of globalisation, primarily in French and English, have emerged from a wide variety of sources. A great number of reports have been produced by parliamentarians, journalists, academics, economists and analysts producing commodious data. These articles and reports either take a strong, ideological stance against globalisation or argue that France has completely failed to adapt to it, an erroneous view according to Gordon and Meunier (2001) and many others. What is of concern in this book is primarily the stance taken by the French towards globalisation. In a 2007 report commissioned by Nicolas Sarkozy on globalisation

CHAPTER 2

44

and French foreign policy, a former Socialist foreign minister Hubert Védrine (2007) analysed the literature review over two decades on the issue. He suggested that French attitude toward this phenomenon can be characterised as one of persistent mistrust and pessimism toward their future and that of their children. In 2001, 45% of the population believed that globalisation offered more disadvantages than benefits for France, 34% opposing this view. The Védrine report is a useful document providing a review of the literature published to date on this vast topic, albeit from the perspective of the French foreign ministry. Védrine argued France should take a more aggressive stance on globalisation, guarding its national interests by protecting strategic industries and adhering to a Gaullist foreign policy that maintains its independence from the US whilst avoiding becoming too Europeanist (Bennhold, 2007a). Védrine warned against yielding to what he termed Atlantist/Westernist temptation that would lead France to re-assume its alliance with NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, forty years after President Charles de Gaulle terminated the treaty. He recommended that French foreign policy adopt a more ‘modest’ tone: a seeming ‘concession’ that was interpreted as a potential warming of Franco-American relations. Védrine also advocated that faced with the challenge of globalisation, France perform and inspire on the European level a much more offensive policy of protection, solidarity and regulation, so that Europe can assume the position of regulator of the globalised world. In addition to this, the EU should be made ‘the most effective level of action in the process of globalisation: the regulating power par excellence’ (Rosenthal, 2007). This report maintains that the economic, social and cultural challenges the French have had to confront over the years have as much to do with the process of European integration as globalisation. Globalisation is perceived negatively by 74% of the salaried sector, 48% by employers. A Euro-baromètre in 2007 revealed 70% of French people considered globalisation as a threat to their identity. An interesting survey undertaken by the Financial Times in 2007 uncovered interesting statistics on the views of six western countries on this subject, confirming that only 18% of the French had a positive view of globalisation compared to 35% of Germans, 23% of Italians, 17% of Spaniards, and rather surprisingly 17% of Americans and 15% of British citizens in favour. These figures put into perspective French reticence toward globalisation. Several Euro-barometers actually measured European mistrust as averaging 47% (Védrine, 2007). One published in 2010 (Européenne, 2010) in fact underscores the impact of the crisis on negative opinions regarding globalisation. Scepticism is thus not exclusive to the French. Globalisation effectively poses greater risks to the EU than the significant role of the State in many European countries. Europeans also have a stronger belief in collective rights and equality, compared to the individualism of most Americans. Some Europeans on the other hand recognise the advantages of globalisation, conscious of the fact that whilst this phenomenon threatens aspects of national cultures, there are also many tangible benefits such as increased prosperity, development and cultural diversity (Gordon, 2004). Undeniably however, globalisation has become an integral part of


45

life in France as it has globally, welcome or not. Changes are taking place in spite of protests orchestrated to slow the march of global trends. According to the Védrine report the roots of anti-globalisation run deep and are quite profoundly entrenched in the French psyche for several reasons.

a) French adherence to the structural role of the state, its protectionist tendencies and political will;

b) Attachment to an identity and a language threatened by the hegemony of English;

c) Jealousy toward perceived Americanisation; d) A perennial moral repugnance against market economy; e) Strong resistance to relinquishing social protection; f) Catholic and Marxist attachment to equality, or more appropriately egalitarianism,

hatred of inequalities generated by financial globalisation; g) French culture is firmly marked by L’Esprit des Lumières (Enlightenment) …

and an increased threat to ecology (Védrine, 2007 p. 5).

With extensive linguistic sojourns in the UK added to her intercultural repertoire, Arlette, at the age of twenty-four, believes that her chances of securing a career as an English language teacher in Paris have been enhanced. She bases this on the choices she made to advance her studies:

Maintenant que je suis partie, je trouve que ça devrait être obligatoire pour tout le monde! … Pas que dans certaines [universités]. Déjà même en anglais c’est pas obligatoire! ... Oui, bouger pour avoir une ouverture d’esprit, et ouvert au changement ... J’ai beaucoup d’amis, quand je leur dis que je suis partie à l’étranger, ça leur semble que c’est quelque chose d’exceptionnel. C’est le gros pas à franchir … [La mondialisation économique] Il faut s’ouvrir au monde … Les gens ont un peu peur mais je pense que c’est une bonne chose dans l’ensemble (Arlette, April, 2008). Now that I’ve been abroad, I think it should be mandatory for everyone! … not just some universities. Even in English, it’s not obligatory! … Yes, travelling to become open-minded, open to change … I have many friends, when I tell them that I went abroad, it seems exceptional to them. It’s a big step to take … [Economic globalisation] You have to open up to the world … people are a little afraid but I think it’s a good thing.

Her positive stance on economic globalisation is emblematic of that of several others of her cohort of young French graduates and students in this inquiry. Their idealistic views are a reflection of their non-judgmental attitude resulting from their intercultural experiences but they are also moderated by insightful and balanced arguments. They are prepared to take the good with the bad unlike their national counterparts. This attitude is clearly not endorsed by the more mature-aged respondents in both studies. Arlette evaluates economic globalisation in a positive light but reinforces nonetheless, perceived French xenophobia on all things foreign. Whilst she applauds President Sarkozy’s policies of France opening up to Europe she criticises his lack of open-mindedness in other

CHAPTER 2

46

issues: Sa politique d’ouverture à l’Europe, ben c’est bien … Après le reste ... je pense pas qu’il soit ouvert! (Arlette, April, 2008). (His policies of opening up to Europe are good … but then the rest … I don’t think he’s open-minded!). An optimistic view on globalisation was also recorded in Christophe’s interview. He is a twenty-one year old law student who is part of the cohort of French expatriate students in my inquiry in Australia. Christophe believes that France opening her frontiers can only assist in improving her economy with participating countries. Moreover, with the European Union, more opportunities are becoming available with the Eastern countries that many consider are a burden. The following stance on globalisation was clearly unpopular with the rest of the co-national cohort. Isabelle is a thirty-three year old teacher and Master in Research candidate. Pragmatic in her views on globalisation when it concerns France’s economy, she believes the phenomenon to be equitable, a type of economic democracy. She argues that economically speaking, if cultures have more contact with each other they will become aware of the discrepancy in standards of living, like China, for instance, that wants a better way of life for its people. She concedes that logically, France will have to lower her standards because along this continuum there will be measures that will self-regulate the process. She suggests: ‘En France on va perdre en qualité de vie, mais cela me paraît normal, une sorte de démocratie économique.’ (Isabelle, April 2009). (In France, we’re going to lower our quality of life, but that seems normal to me, a sort of economic democracy.) Parisian-born Malika is a twenty-two year old tertiary student whose North African background poses significant problems with regard to her employment prospects. She is part of my student cohort of French nationals. Malika’s view on academic mobility does not contribute anything new to this research but her interpretation of the negativity towards globalisation is noteworthy and indicative of the open-minded attitude toward the subject by individuals who have intercultural experience. She alleges many French people are anti-American because Americans have more power and they wish to impose their culture onto others. Malika censures this attitude suggesting they are too attached to their culture and are essentially stuck in the era of colonisation and imperialism. People perceive contact between cultures negatively because it implies competition and they forget the positive aspects of the exchange experience. She criticises the French public for their judgmental ways towards other cultures because they fail to recognise the incredible cultural diversity in France, with individuals from everywhere generally recognised as Black, Blanc, Beur (Black, White, Arab) as the popular axiom suggests. The lamentable part is that these cultures are not accepted. She argues: ‘Et si elles sont acceptées, elles ne sont pas estimées autant qu’elles devraient l’être.’ (Malika, April, 2008). (And if they are, they are not appreciated as much as they should be). Malika cannot comprehend why appearances are so important in France, why people need to be categorised and labeled according to their appearance. She had found a perfect fit in Spain, her third place during her cultural exchange, finding it refreshing that she should not be judged by her looks, demeanour or more frustratingly, her Algerian name. In brief, the third place is a


47

position between two cultures signifying a place where learners can interact comfortably with individuals from the host culture without compromising their own identity (Liddicoat, Crozet, & Lo Bianco, 1999). Malika’s case will be exemplified in Chapter 4 on social issues that may provoke brain drain in the young educated sector of the population. Integration issues are so considerable in France that it would require an entire book to deal with the nuances of the question satisfactorily. Further research is clearly indicated in this area. In this project, intercultural experiences were significant in influencing the views of participants on the subject of globalisation. Guy is a forty-four year old French national born in Martinique, whose upbringing in four African countries has afforded him a plethora of intercultural experiences. His choice of residency in France is based solely on the need to see his children as his divorced status would pose serious limitations of access if he were to return to the life he loves in Ivory Coast. Guy’s pragmatic approach to globalisation is born of his experiences abroad: ‘On est obligés d’être dans la mondialisation, au moins d’un point de vue échanges. On peut pas l’arrêter! On est obligés sinon on reste chez soi et puis qu’est-ce qu’on fait après?’ (Guy, April, 2009). (We have to accept globalisation, at least from the point of view of exchanges. We can’t stop it! We have to, otherwise we stay at home and then what do we do?) He argues that France has no choice but to accept globalisation even if it is detrimental to her economy. In support of his argument, Guy cites the case of a foreign company selling television sets that established its business in the north of France with financial assistance partly shared by the government and the region. A significant amount of money was spent to allow this business to flourish. Subsequently, the company claimed that employee salaries, taxes and company charges were too onerous and they promptly closed their factory. Guy is unimpressed by the audacity of the foreigners: ‘On va fermer l’usine mais elle nous appartient, même si c’est l’Etat qui l’a fait construire avec son argent. On va partir faire nos téléviseurs ailleurs dans un pays qui nous coûte moins cher en main d’œuvre. Et on va pouvoir revendre notre usine, puisqu’elle nous appartient.’ (Guy, April, 2009). (We’re going to close the factory but it belongs to us, even if it’s the State that built it with French money. We’re going to manufacture our televisions elsewhere in a country with cheaper labour. And we’re going to on-sell our factory because it belongs to us!). Guy asserts that similar injustices occurred with the building of Euro Disney on acquired land where the locals have never been properly compensated. He accepts this inevitable aspect of globalisation nonetheless for it would otherwise be hypocritical as he admits that the French engage in exactly the same practices whether this be in Slovakia, Bulgaria or Romania. With the bilingual status French-Polish, Serge’s future seems guaranteed thanks to his bi-cultural standing and his research of job opportunities. Based on this advantage, he chose to specialise in European Fiscal Law over a career in Business law or lofty position as Judge, as per his initial interests, for these areas are saturated in France and they offer few competitive advantages. Although fiscal law is an unattractive avenue for most students according to Serge, this choice affords

CHAPTER 2

48

him a brilliant career either in France or another European country in government or in academia. Serge’s view on economic globalisation is complex, once again providing other dimensions to the debate on this topic. His perspicacious views belie a person of his age but his maturity is not unexpected if one understands the rigorous nature of French education coupled with his industrious approach to his studies. Serge evaluates the pros and cons of globalisation in general as this phenomenon does not affect only France. All elements must be considered in the equation. Whilst in principle he is in favour of economic globalisation, he can perceive serious limitations. He identifies issues with the inequity that can be created at the nexus of western civilisations and developing countries. He is concerned that greed ultimately takes priority over fair trading at the expense of the poorer nations. Further, reaching conformity on fundamental concepts based on religious issues is also likely to cause complications in the different models of globalisation adopted by the Europeans or Anglo-Saxon countries for example, in their dealings with the Middle-Eastern sector. Serge deems the exploitation of developing countries for their cheap labour unjustified, especially if labourers are tortured or forced to endure inhuman treatment only to find the excessive reliance on petrol prohibitive. The effects of the GFC only compound the problem naturally. He says: ‘J’ai un problème sur le transport. C’est une dépense énergétique très importante. Donc on fait une économie de quelques cents au niveau de la production mais on va utiliser des tonnes de pétrole.’ (Serge, April, 2009). (I have a problem concerning transport. It’s a considerable expense of energy. So, one saves a few cents on the production only to use tons of petrol). Serge’s major concern is that not all countries play by the same rules, with obvious outcomes for rich and poor countries. This fact negates the advantages of globalisation, thus rendering processes inefficient. He proposes another valid argument on the exchange of ideas suggesting that agreement on certain fundamental issues, particularly religious in orientation, will never be achieved. He cites the case of Ireland and England for example on a potential clash in religious principles when discussions turn to the question of abortion. He adds: ‘S’il n’y a pas de critères décisifs sur ce qui est bon ou mauvais, sur le oui ou non, la mondialisation n’aidera pas à ce niveau-là. Et donc ces types de frontières culturelles fondamentales sur les droits fondamentaux seront plus difficiles à accepter et je ne prends qu’un modèle strictement Européen.’ (If there are no decisive criteria on the good or the bad, the yes or the no, globalisation will not assist at that level. Therefore, these types of fundamental cultural barriers on fundamental rights will be harder to accept and I’m using strictly the European model). Where agreements are sought on fundamental rights between the eastern and western nations, one is evidently confronted with a mine field. Where there is a hike in unemployment generated by decentralisation, Serge provides a cogent argument that the French Social System is equipped to counter the problem because the French enjoy an exceptional social safety net. He justifies his reasoning in this quotation: ‘Changer a toujours posé des problèmes et pas qu’en France, mais en France tout particulièrement. Quand il y a des personnes qui perdent leur travail, la France garde un système social très protecteur et ils ne


49

sont pas tant à plaindre que ça. Même si c’est des situations dramatiques, ça pourrait être pire.’ (Serge, April, 2009). (Change has always posed a problem and not only for the French, but in France particularly. When people lose their jobs, there’s an overprotective social system in place and they have nothing to complain about. Even in dramatic situations, things could be worse). Serge says that there have been some reforms in this area recently but he maintains that the French can still enjoy a comfortable life on unemployment benefits and this poses some serious problems in some instances. Negative public sentiment was brought to the limelight in August 1999, when a French sheep farmer, José Bové, made headlines when he was arrested for dismantling the construction site of a McDonald’s restaurant in the French town of Millau. He argued that he had acted in retaliation to American trade sanctions against European products and the unrestrained spread of globalisation. In so doing, Bové’s actions resonated with French public opinion and he was instantly championed as a national hero. He was even invited by the French government to join their delegation to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) summit in Seattle that year, along with the leaders of anti-globalisation protests (Meunier, 1999). The effects of globalisation and the negative sentiments of the French can be conceived as a battle unique to the French because their political and cultural identity comprise all the elements that can be perceived as being under threat. Meunier suggests that this explains why the French have taken on the role of international leader against the dissemination of Anglo-Saxon globalisation. The elements include: ‘a universalist culture; a language with international aspirations; a ‘superior’ food; an older practice of democracy; a sensitive view of national sovereignty; a central role of the State; a need for a world role; a sense of duty towards the more disadvantaged nations; and, most of all, a deep-rooted anti-Americanism’ (Meunier, 1999). Whereas trade discourse formerly focused on the openness/protectionist debate, with special interest groups lobbying their governments for protection from international competition, globalisation witnessed a discourse shift toward Anglo-Saxon globalisation versus preservation of national and cultural identity (Meunier, 1999). Trade politics is no longer merely a discussion of quotas and prices, as cultural, political and social elements have become interweaved into the debate, and the French are not alone in their negative stance on this issue. Consumer groups, environmentalists, human rights activists and key government leaders from a wide range of countries have all highlighted the negative consequences of globalisation. This concerns the undemocratic nature of the trade regime, the social failures of the free market and the risk of environmental degradation (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). In contrast with dichotomous views or those in favour of globalisation, Gervais, a thirty-one year old African-born French national participant residing in Paris acknowledges that the French fear globalisation. A bac+5 Geography graduate fortunate enough to have found employment in Paris, Gervais provides a pertinent example justifying this fear. In his field of work, at a trade fair on geographical software, his search for a company producing cartography, apparently a painstakingly slow and expensive process, revealed that not one single company

CHAPTER 2

50

carried out this work in France. They had all outsourced the labour in Madagascar. Reinforcing Gervais’ views, Roselyne, the social worker in this inquiry finds economic globalisation catastrophic and rebukes French companies that use the GFC as an excuse to move their businesses overseas to avoid bankruptcy. The data showed decentralisation to be a significant issue. Catherine, an expatriate participant of this inquiry living in London has a sarcastic comment to add on the subject: ‘La décentralisation est mauvaise pour la France parce que en même temps nous les jeunes avec les études qu’on fait on nous bourre le crâne avec les études. Donc plus personne ne veut aller à la chaîne, donc je pense qu’il n’y aurait plus personne pour le faire. On peut toujours aller dans le domaine du bâtiment!’ (Catherine, April, 2008). (Decentralisation is bad for France because whilst this is happening, we the young people, with our education they’re cramming our brains with studies. Therefore, no one wants to do the manual labour anymore, so I think there’ll be no one left to do this. We could always go into the building industry!) Dominique is another twenty-eight year old graduate, also from my French national cohort who further indicts companies that profit from the GFC in order to enforce laws that allow them to fire personnel on the grounds of economic hardship: ‘Ils vont vous dire: « on vous propose un reclassement. Qui veut aller habiter en Chine ou autre part ? » Si on est licencié pour raison économique on ne peut rien faire. Donc automatiquement on se retrouve au chômage car la main d’œuvre est moins chère en Chine qu’en France.’ (Dominique, April, 2008). (They’ll tell you: ‘We can redeploy you. Who would like to go and live in China or elsewhere?’ If you’re fired for economic hardship there’s nothing you can do. So you’re automatically unemployed because labour is less expensive in China than in France). Dominique, who is visibly against economic globalisation, unveils practices that are increasing in popularity in the north of France and she bemoans the fact that they are clearly detrimental for France. She is a bac+2 in Business administration living in the south of France. Dominique is grateful for her CDI (Contrat à Durée Indéterminée – a permanent employment contract) in the tourist sector because it offers her security but the job is far from her field of expertise. She went to Australia for twelve months on a working holiday and to perfect her English because she knew that her position was safe. Dominique reinforces the negative opinions of the French public on economic globalisation as she compares the northerners with those living in the south. She criticises the northerners who use their geographic location to their advantage with damaging consequences for France. In addition to those who emigrate to the UK, she says these people can create businesses in England that benefit them economically because of lower taxes. She argues: ‘Donc déjà rien qu’à ce niveau-là, la France perd beaucoup de patrons et de salariés, parce qu’au point de vue économique c’est plus avantageux de travailler en Angleterre qu’en France.’ (Dominique, April, 2008). (So, if only on that level, France loses many company owners and salaried employees because economically, it’s more advantageous to work in England than in France). A perfect exemple of this increasingly popular trend is derived from Lise’s interview. She is a bac+5 forming part of the expatriate cohort of this inquiry. At


51

twenty-four she is embarking on a Ph.D. in Australia after completing her Masters degree there. Thanks to the Internet, Lise’s partner is able to continue his work online with his French bosses who reside in the north of France as this young couple have no desire to return home. It is hard to rationalise keeping French businesses in France where bureaucracy, crippling taxes and contracting conditions preclude lucrative opportunities. Therefore some of these company bosses enjoy a bucolic lifestyle in northern France and carry out their businesses from home on the Internet. This practice is gaining momentum and those who are bilingual are reaping the rewards as they can generate business globally with few overheads. Robert’s views on economic globalisation are in stark contrast with his comments on academic mobility. His persuasive stance on the subject merits consideration as it is also representative of opinions from his cohort of thirty-three plus years in this inquiry. Given the views elaborated in the literature review of this chapter, it appears that the elite and educated sector of the French public concur with his arguments even if these observations differ considerably with those of the older citizens and those less educated.

It’s terrible when you don’t take into account the needs of the people. This industrial globalisation is a catastrophe! It all involves money. When you look what is happening with the Olympics now. I mean they chose China because of the money. This kind of globalisation is nonsense, but it’s the way our societies work now. Sarkozy is like Senior and Junior Bush. He’s the French Bush. Awful! It’s a general problem to know if politics still have influence on society. From an economic point of view we know that the State is having less and less weight because of the globalisation of the money systems. And then of course in what concerns international affairs, the State is important. On social affairs, that depends. It’s so strongly linked with the economy that again the State has some influence on the economy but not enough to have some consequences on the social part. So it’s not only the matter of being Sarkozy or another guy, in general the governments are having less weight on the fate of the country (Robert, April, 2008).

When asked whether the French government had to follow the dictates of the European Union or other leading western nations, Robert flagged one of the big debates currently raging in France. In the introductory chapter of this book, similar thoughts were expressed by Macleod (April, 2009) with reference to the elite who have the support of the government. The upper classes need not fear as they control the balance of power:

This is one of the big debates. How far can you stay away from this and keep some autonomy of course? One of the biggest fears that come from globalisation economically is to have a world money control, which is indifferent of the will of the people. The people with money have the control. If you have a lot of money it doesn’t matter where you live. If you have money you have a nice house and you live in the States and you wish to go for shopping to Paris this weekend: take the airplane, go there, go back. I

CHAPTER 2

52

mean those people are those who decide that a factory is not efficient enough in France, we just move it to China, who cares? Because those people are not necessarily French anyway … I’m not against the fact that a product is ‘Made in China’, what I’m against is that it’s made in China by a totalitarian government who is controlling its people and not paying them to the right level and making them slaves to be competitive. This is terrible. It’s the French industrial power that is taking advantage of that. The problem is that after a while, I’m afraid that our economies are going to get poorer because of this. I mean what we can still provide is high level technology and things that China isn’t able to do, but this won’t last for long anyways (Robert, April, 2008).

Robert is passionate about this subject and the concerns he raises are echoed in the literature provided by politicians, researchers and commentators from various fields. It is clear that the globalisation debate is far from being satisfactorily resolved in French society as the different factions are quick to verify their claims. Robert identifies several issues that have provoked a negative view of globalisation for French people: the loss of political economic autonomy and control for France; the encroachment from other western civilisations on French way of life, particularly when they dictate how France should run its nation; the abuse or ill-treatment of workers by totalitarian regimes in developing countries; and competition in technological and educational fields generated by the industrial and educational revolution in these countries. Robert argues this revolution consequently threatens France’s leadership and advantage in many fields. He is aware that:

China and India or whoever will soon be able to buy the same technology. What are our people going to do in France? With another Ph.D. or high-level engineer, what can we provide that China cannot provide? China or any other country anyways. In this type of globalisation the problem is that we’re not taking into account what happens to the Chinese people (Robert, April, 2008).

The above issues match fairly closely the challenges that confront the French as summarised by Frost, (2002). These can be summed up into five main concerns: the dirigiste or statist tradition; adherence to culture and identity; the disruption of a rational order; the menace to France’s global standing; and the high standard of living (Frost, 2002). Politicians have a vested interest in the globalisation debate as a result of the dirigiste tradition as the French remain one of the largest state sectors of Europe. They are seen by some to be resisting globalisation more than the public as the need to relinquish control is a thorny issue. As such, the erosion of power has engendered a move toward the protectionism of culture rather than economics (Frost, 2002). A new catch phrase mondiaphobie or globalophobie (Védrine, 2007), describing an irrational fear of globalisation, and the reputed protectionnisme in French discourse exemplify French attitudes vis-à-vis globalisation. The older the citizens


53

or the less educated, the more worried they are, and not only on a cultural level. Globalisation is perceived by a large majority of people as a cause of social inequality, a danger to French jobs and community and a threat to French gastronomy as the youth in particular adopt fast foods with vigour. Globalisation is perceived as something that needs to be ‘tamed’ or ‘managed’, mondialisation maîtrisée, a notion that should be embraced rather than condemned (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). This view is worthy of consideration as the French are not alone in their fears. Jacques, a twenty-five year old who is part of the expatriate cohort of this inquiry and who has established himself successfully in Brazil, cautions against the dangers of globalisation:

Le monde tend malheureusement à aller vers une hégémonie de tout. C’est mon impression du moins. Les nouvelles technologies de communication et la facilité d’aller d’un pays à un autre aujourd’hui font que les frontières s’affaissent petit à petit. La planète évolue vers une identité mondiale unique. J’espère que nous saurons garder la richesse qu’apporte la différence justement (Jacques, March 2008). The world is unfortunately heading toward a hegemony of everything. At least this is my impression. New communication technologies and the ease of mobility between countries are breaking down frontiers bit by bit. The planet is evolving toward a unique world identity. I hope that we’ll know how to preserve the wealth that diversity brings.

Jacques’ comments strengthen the principle that perhaps globalisation indeed needs to be ‘tamed’ because the world appears to be heading toward supremacy of everything. As frontiers are brought down it would indeed be a shame not to embrace the challenges and opportunities that cultural diversity brings. Controversial views emerged from the data of this inquiry. Xavier, thirty-six years old is an expatriate living in Australia. His views are a little radical but nonetheless in line with French public opinion. He uses an interesting metaphor to describe globalisation.

Globalisation can be a good thing but it’s like the atomic bomb, like the fusion of the atom. You can use it to a very good means or to a very bad means. So there are good parts. Globalisation is more like, wherever you go you feel a bit at home, because you’re going to see the same thing that you see in France. You’re going to recognise the brands everywhere around the world. Free trades, it’s more open, it’s not as secular. Before you went to Germany fifteen, twenty years ago and it was a different country, different culture. You’re not going to Germany anymore, you’re moving in Europe … the big problem with globalisation is we won’t be able to stop companies like Monsanto, the multinational based in the US that makes all this GM shit. Everybody is focused on global warming but they’re going to poison us to death. It’s all started anyway. So we’re f***** basically! The OGM, (Genetically Modified products), that’s the downside of globalisation (Xavier, April 2008).

CHAPTER 2

54

It appears that in spite of a worsening economy, the French apparently were still anti-globalisation in 2010, unwilling to admit that they had been enjoying its benefits for many years. Examples of these abound and have been enumerated by ministers and proponents of the phenomenon over the years. Alain Juppé’s (2000) speech on France and Globalisation in 2000 is one report that highlights France’s adoption of globalisation in a number of domains. From the diverse fields listed where France has been actively participating in global trends, it is apparent that the French economy has undergone a process of liberalisation over the last twenty-five years in accordance with Europeanisation and globalisation. France ranks behind only the UK in the amount of foreign investment capital gained by European countries (Sabatier, 2006). However, given the open resistance towards globalisation in France, one might question how this change has eventuated? The answer is that changes have taken place gradually and stealthily. Whilst appealing to public sentiment and continuing to call for State-controlled mitigation of globalisation’s negative consequences, France’s political and business communities have realised that it is less and less plausible for the State to play a dominant role in running the economy. Consequently, a process of economic liberalisation has been operating, albeit quietly and painfully slowly. Gordon and Meunier (2001) have dubbed this process ‘globalisation by stealth.’ Marylise and Chantal both proffered opinions on academic mobility that are undisputed by their cohort of interviewees but their comments bear witness to the liberalising of France. Marylise, an academic bac + 8 (Ph.D.) who is part of the cohort of French national academics in this inquiry, foresees considerable risks in the liberalising effects of globalisation in France. She warns that the imposition of a dominant model of development, i.e. liberalist or ultra-liberalist logic could constitute a threat to her country and cause problems. In spite of the liberalist model allowing for more rapid productivity Marylise is opposed to the notion of ‘one model of globalisation fits all countries’ for its obvious deliterious effects on cultural diversity, particularly as it is the US that imposes the model in most instances. The complexities involved with theories of liberalism are mirrored in Chantal’s testimony. Her knowledge in the field of French culture and political science is impressive and her comments on neo-liberalism may help clarify the question. An excerpt from her interview gives us an insight into the complexity of this issue for France.

It is a very complex situation … because I think there’s no doubt that France forgets how much it contributed to the development of liberalism, not liberalism as narrow as it is in Australia but as a set of principles that allowed the opinions of a modern form of democracy based on the representative politics. Liberalism in France is misunderstood because it was narrowed down in Britain, in the US, in Australia and other countries that came from the British model to a narrow understanding of economic liberalism. And the French misunderstand what liberalism is about and in fact they are liberal and they themselves contribute to liberalism … Sarkozy is a neo-liberal. They were all about market deficiency and about forcing French people to be more


55

flexible, deregulating the labour market, but he wanted France to go down the path which was established in the 80s by Reagan and Thatcher. Of course now that we have the global financial crisis it has become a bit less popular (Chantal, July, 2010).

In her university lectures, Chantal stresses the danger of taking the rhetoric for reality when studying French culture. She asserts: ‘French society, French democracy has a strong liberal dimension. It’s just never admitted because it’s not part of the ideology, but it gives the impression that society is dominated by the State and it’s wrong!’ She concludes that during the big crisis of the 70s when liberalism became dominant, the Anglo-American world took one path and France and all the continents … the European countries took another path. Both paths led to a rise in inequality, generating more acute forms of inequality (Chantal, July, 2010). These acute forms of inequality reported by interviewees are significant for this book, providing evidence to the arguments made by Chauvel (2008). Chantal’s point of view will once again feature in other chapters as they are intrinsic to the theses in this book.

Opinions vary but by and large many prominent French politicians are also outspoken critics of globalisation, reflecting the deep level of public mistrust. Whilst globalisation has led to growth in the world economies, buoying corporate income, little gain is perceived by citizens who prefer to blame economic integration for a stagnant economy, growing retirement and health issues in lieu of specific policies. In 2006, over half of a World Economic Forum survey of Europeans predicted a bleak economic future. A fear of hordes of immigrant workers – characterised by the low-cost Polish plumber – allegedly taking the jobs that no one really wanted anyhow, resulted in France rejecting the EU Constitution. Ultimately, many European politicians prefer protectionist rhetoric because they know that the real message implies cuts in benefits and taxes, together with labour flexibility in order to attract younger workers (Dapice, 2006). Ultimately people vote with their feet and the Eurostar generation have paved the way for an increasing exodus. The Védrine (2007) report highlights the fact that the undeniable link between identity and French language and culture has made it in fact much harder for the French to openly accept liberal, financial and deregulated globalisation than other nations that depend far less on a state-controlled system. In spite of having effectively adapted to globalisation for some years now, the French are still professing to be anti-globalisation as they will not admit to its adoption by stealth. It appears that pedagogical programmes need to be implemented to inform the recalcitrant public of the merits of globalisation as many confess to a lack of understanding about the economy of their country. Those in favour of opening to the world can be categorised as company heads, employers, a large number of economists, and the media. Opponents comprise the majority of ecologists, and the political far left that cannot recognise any merit of globalisation, except for human mobility with the aim of ultimately breaking down national identities and barriers. This is the group that apportions blame, from mass unemployment to delocalisation, to immigrants

CHAPTER 2

56

arriving in France and taking the jobs of French nationals. Censure is also clearly directed at a government that has failed to create more jobs for the newly qualified graduates. Negative opinions abound as twenty years of pro-globalisation propaganda, programmes, reports and innumerable articles published to inform and change French opinion as to the benefits of globalisation have fallen on deaf ears, failing dismally. An urgent analysis of this resounding negativity is clearly indicated as the French, along with many of her neighbours resist change. An interesting adjunct to this scenario is Védrine’s sardonic comment that if it were possible for ‘globalisation’ to be the object of a referendum in the European Union, it is quite probable that an emphatic ‘No’ would be registered (Védrine, 2007). Academic mobility has paved the way for increasing international opportunities for those who can meet the challenges involved. Lise has embarked on a Masters degree in criminology in Australia because she believes this field is underdeveloped in France and few creditable universities offer courses in this area: ‘I really wanted to do a Master in Criminology which was only proposed in a bad reputation university in Rennes’ (Lise, November, 2010). She is confident that her Ph.D. in this field will provide her with renewed chances of a rewarding career either in Australia or the US. Lise’s views on globalisation provide an added dimension to the insights gathered from the interviews. She argues, whilst globalisation has its positive sides, there is also a downside to the phenomenon. In the past, French people were educated and had no problem finding employment but now there is a new trend. She says that parents push their children to achieve but ‘offers for qualified people become rare and people start to be more and more overqualified.’ Lise believes that the profile of Europe is changing, becoming a place of thinkers (doctors, lawyers, engineers), and where manufacturing of goods and manual labour is outsourced to underdeveloped countries. She argues: ‘there is penury of manual workers in France because everybody studies more and more and the government is looking to employ other people because they can work for better prices.’ Lise believes graduates are too numerous now to compete for the limited positions and they are starting to leave France to find better opportunities abroad. She concludes with a damning statement:

Even with a bac+5 or 6, finding a job is very difficult and if you don’t have pistons (contacts), in some areas it’s almost impossible! … Moreover, nowadays with the extent of the technologies and globalisation, the boundaries are just there for the national identity and as a cultural reference because anybody, especially young people, can at any time decide to leave their own country in order to work anywhere in the world (Lise, November, 2010).

The French public’s stance on globalisation appears questionable and inconsistent in light of the Védrine (2007) report when one considers that, on a practical, economic and political level, France has stealthily opened up to the world market economy whilst public opinion and attitudes continue to be suspicious of the American/Anglo-Saxon free market system and fearful of its effects on their life


57

style. How ironic that France should be one of the most avid consumers of McDonald’s burgers in Europe? Added to this, many of the most thriving global companies happen to be French (Ash, 2007). Negative attitudes have clearly been powerless in stopping such a global phenomenon from taking hold. Védrine argues France would be a much stronger force if together the French could achieve a dynamic consensus on the issue of globalisation, a harmonious cohesion, comprising adaptation, protection, regulation, solidarity and European action. He maintains: ‘Un consensus Français ambitieux dans la mondialisation n’entraverait pas la poursuite du débat publique.’ (Védrine, 2007 p. 9). (An ambitious French consensus towards globalisation would not impede the pursuit of public debate). In sum, Védrine advocates the urgency for a shift from sterile fear and mistrust of globalisation toward a dynamic offensive within globalisation. France must ultimately affirm its position and defend its interests (Ibid.). Interestingly, in 2001, the foreign minister was quoted as saying that: ‘globalisation does not automatically benefit France [because it] develops according to principles that correspond neither to French tradition nor French culture.’ This comprised free market economics, mistrust of the State, common law, the English language, individualism inconsistent with the republican tradition, and the reinforcement of the role of the US. Therefore globalisation’s challenge to France is that she ‘must make an exceptional effort to adapt’ (Gordon & Meunier, 2001). Védrine argued the French lacked confidence in coping with globalisation and the only way of giving them back their confidence was to ‘protect’ them through ‘much more offensive regulation’ and social policies to mitigate the impact of globalisation on every-day lives. Finally, ‘we need a policy mix that combines economic reform, solidarity, more regulation and protection’ (Bennhold, 2007a). In conclusion, whilst many aspects of dirigisme persist in the French economy, and in spite of public opinion remaining sceptical on the subject of globalisation, the overall picture is of a country engaging in its own very French way, the challenges brought forward by a more integrated world economy (Gordon & Meunier, 2001).

THE FRENCH AND THE INTERNET

An important factor inducing young French entrepreneurs to emigrate to the US is the delayed reaction by France to embrace the Internet. The French did not immediately join the masses worldwide that welcomed the technological advances of the Internet, stubbornly refusing to abandon surfing their cherished government controlled Minitel version of the Web. This clever invention of the black-and-white Minitel in the 1970s was construed as avant-garde technology at the time and without doubt contributed to their fierce national pride. In fact it came to ‘symbolise home-grown ingenuity’ (Moulaison, 2004). Defensibly so, as it was, after all the world’s first and largest market in electronic commerce (Edmondson, 1997). However, because of the visceral bonds with their traditions or perhaps their resistance to change, it took some time before the French were ready to allow Minitel to surrender to the Internet as they were conscious of the

CHAPTER 2

58

fact that the predominant language of the Internet was English. As the Internet, originating from the US could be blamed for the encroaching perceived danger caused by the supremacy of English as a global language, the menacing phenomenon of the Internet did nothing to engage the French to be at the forefront of developments in this field. It was perhaps a paradox, in the land of paradoxes, that ‘the value of the Minitel should democratise information in a country where socialism dominates politics, shows itself in that it is a tool that is engineered for that very specific society. The Minitel in many ways seems the very embodiment of the French motto of Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité’ (Moulaison, 2004 p. 9). The government push for adoption of the Internet and with it mass communication was clearly going to throw into question classic French political, economic, and social hierarchies, (Edmondson, 1997) thus opening up a metaphorical can of worms. In 1997, Businessweek reported the then Prime Minister Lionel Jospin as acknowledging that France was falling dangerously behind the rest of the world as the Minitel was proving to be an impediment to the rapid deployment of the Internet (Edmondson, 1998; Moulaison, 2004). The dissemination of information globally was imperative if France was to function in its role as one of the leading economies of Europe. The prediction did not take long to manifest, proving an embarrassment to many French organisations. On the other hand, the Minitel made French people web savvy before the Internet made its debut, considering their intensive training in online transactions in readiness for the day they would finally embrace this new Anglo-Saxon technology (Morddel, 2010). Equipped with a small keyboard and a ‘pre-historic’ terminal that resembled the old-fashioned computer and hooked up to the telephone line, the Minitel could be employed to do everything from making online purchases, searching the telephone directory, bank transfers, booking travels online, to even enjoying soft-porn conversations (Lagorce, 2003), but the communication was not global. Unfortunately, government attempts to encourage its businesses and citizens alike into making the transition to the Internet met with dismal failure until 2006 when 23% of households could boast a dual platform computer that could assist the population in adopting the new online medium. To place this in perspective, in 2000, 4% of French households owned a computer compared to 44% in the US. The limited transactions and transfer of data that this service provided for French citizens lulled them into complacency and a false sense of security when it came to communication, which was largely restricted to the Hexagon. In essence, this feature of French technology retarded the innovative start-up companies that finally mushroomed in Paris. If the majority of these young entrepreneurs had not emigrated to the Silicon Valley in the US, France may have held its own in the global world of advanced technologies. Instead, there are myriad complaints about the inefficacy of the French Internet networks, largely from international students who cannot help but compare the ingenious features of their technological advances with that of their host society in France during intercultural exchanges.


59

Danielle offers sound justification in defense of French recalcitrance to the introduction of the Internet in France and places the issue in perspective:

One of the reasons why France was so behind with her Internet development resides in the fact that telephone costs remained very high until recently. Every phone call had to be paid and there were no free local calls like in the US. For decades, there was only one phone company in France (France Telecom) which owns both the lines and the equipment and which was the only operator. So as a monopole, it regulated the whole phone market. We stayed with our old Minitel, not because it was fun, but because most of us had chosen a basic free model and were using it as an electronic phone directory whose first three minutes of research were free of charge. I subscribed to the Internet at home five years ago when the European Union forced France to deregulate the market and this brought competition (Danielle, August, 2011).

Given the effects of the downturn on most countries it is important to document how government policies have negatively affected the French economy. As a result, the impact this state of affairs has had on the young educated French individuals will become even more significant.

the legacy of the baby boomers or the the legacy of the ... · pdf fileare the baby boomers to...

Documents