Globalization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Globalization (or globalisation) describes the process by which regional economies, societies,
and cultures have become integrated through a global network of political ideas through
communication, transportation, and trade. The term is most closely associated with the term
economic globalization: the integration of national economies into the international economy
through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, the spread of technology, and
military presence.[1] However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a
combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors.[2] The
term can also refer to the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, or popular culture through
acculturation. An aspect of the world which has gone through the process can be said to be
globalized.
Against this view, an alternative approach stresses how globalization has actually decreased
inter-cultural contacts while increasing the possibility of international and intra-national conflict.
[3]

Contents
[hide]
• 1 Definitions
• 2 Effects summary
• 3 Cultural effects
○ 3.1 Democratizing effect of communications
• 4 Economic liberalization
○ 4.1 Jobs
 4.1.1 Income inequality
 4.1.2 Brain drains
 4.1.3 Sweatshops
○ 4.2 Business process outsourcing
○ 4.3 Natural resources
 4.3.1 Air
 4.3.2 Forests
 4.3.3 Minerals
 4.3.4 Effects of population growth on food supplies
○ 4.4 Health
○ 4.5 Global market
  4.5.1 Expansion
 4.5.2 Financial interdependency
 4.5.3 Drug and illicit goods trade
• 5 Debate
○ 5.1 Politicization in the United States
○ 5.2 Other industrialized countries
○ 5.3 Developing world
• 6 Alternative interpretations
○ 6.1 Advocates
○ 6.2 Practical approach
○ 6.3 Critics
○ 6.4 Common ground
• 7 Anti-globalization movement
• 8 History
○ 8.1 Post-World War II
• 9 Measurement
• 10 See also
• 11 References
• 12 Further reading
• 13 External links
○ 13.1 Multimedia

[edit] Definitions
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "globalization" was first employed in a
publication entitled Towards New Education in 1952, to denote a holistic view of human
experience in education.[4] An early description of globalization was penned by the founder of the
Bible Student movement Charles Taze Russell who coined the term 'corporate giants' in 1897,[5]
although it was not until the 1960s that the term began to be widely used by economists and
other social scientists. The term has since then achieved widespread use in the mainstream press
by the later half of the 1980s. Since its inception, the concept of globalization has inspired
numerous competing definitions and interpretations, with antecedents dating back to the great
movements of trade and empire across Asia and the Indian Ocean from the 15th century
onwards.[6]
The United Nations ESCWA says globalization "is a widely-used term that can be defined in a
number of different ways. When used in an economic context, it refers to the reduction and
removal of barriers between national borders in order to facilitate the flow of goods, capital,
services and labour... although considerable barriers remain to the flow of labor... Globalization
is not a new phenomenon. It began towards the end of the nineteenth century, but it slowed down
during the period from the start of the First World War until the third quarter of the twentieth
century. This slowdown can be attributed to the inward-looking policies pursued by a number of
countries in order to protect their respective industries... however, the pace of globalization
picked up rapidly during the fourth quarter of the twentieth century..."[7]

HSBC, the world's largest bank, operates across the globe.[8][9] Shown here is the HSBC Global
Technology Centre in Pune, India which develops software for the entire HSBC group.[10]
Tom G. Palmer of the Cato Institute defines globalization as "the diminution or elimination of
state-enforced restrictions on exchanges across borders and the increasingly integrated and
complex global system of production and exchange that has emerged as a result."[11]
Thomas L. Friedman has examined the impact of the "flattening" of the world, and argues that
globalized trade, outsourcing, supply-chaining, and political forces have changed the world
permanently, for both better and worse. He also argues that the pace of globalization is
quickening and will continue to have a growing impact on business organization and practice.[12]
Finally, Takis Fotopoulos argues that globalization is the result of systemic trends manifesting
the market economy's grow-or-die dynamic, following the rapid expansion of transnational
corporations. Because these trends have not been offset effectively by counter-tendencies that
could have emanated from trade-union action and other forms of political activity, the outcome
has been globalization. This is a multi-faceted and irreversible phenomenon within the system of
the market economy and it is expressed as: economic globalization, namely, the opening and
deregulation of commodity, capital and labour markets which led to the present form of
neoliberal globalization; political globalization, i.e., the emergence of a transnational elite and
the phasing out of the all powerful nation-state of the statist period; cultural globalization, i.e.,
the worldwide homogenisation of culture; ideological globalization; technological globalization;
social globalization.[13]
[edit] Effects summary
Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways
• Industrial – emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of
foreign products for consumers and companies. Particularly movement of material and
goods between and within national boundaries. International trade in manufactured goods
increased more than 100 times (from $95 billion to $12 trillion) in the 50 years since
1955.[14] China's trade with Africa rose sevenfold during 2000–07 alone.[15][16]
• Financial – emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external
financing for borrowers. By the early part of the 21st century more than $1.5 trillion in
national currencies were traded daily to support the expanded levels of trade and
investment.[17]
As of 2005–2007, the Port of Shanghai holds the title as the World's busiest port.[18][19][20]
• Economic – realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of
goods and capital.[21]

Almost all notable worldwide IT companies have a presence in India. Four Indians were among
the world's top 10 richest in 2008, worth a combined $160 billion.[22] In 2007, China had 415,000
millionaires and India 123,000.[23]
• Job Market- competition in a global job market. In the past, the economic fate of workers
was tied to the fate of national economies. With the advent of the information age and
improvements in communication, this is no longer the case. Because workers compete in
a global market, wages are less dependent on the success or failure of individual
economies. This has had a major effect on wages and income distribution.[24]
• Political – some use "globalization" to mean the creation of a world government which
regulates the relationships among governments and guarantees the rights arising from
social and economic globalization.[25] Politically, the United States has enjoyed a position
of power among the world powers, in part because of its strong and wealthy economy.
With the influence of globalization and with the help of the United States’ own economy,
the People's Republic of China has experienced some tremendous growth within the past
decade. If China continues to grow at the rate projected by the trends, then it is very
likely that in the next twenty years, there will be a major reallocation of power among the
world leaders. China will have enough wealth, industry, and technology to rival the
United States for the position of leading world power.[26]
Among the political effects some scholars also name the transformation of sovereignty. In their
opinion, 'globalization contributes to the change and reduction of nomenclature and scope of
state sovereign powers, and besides it is a bilateral process: on the one hand, the factors are
strengthening that fairly undermine the countries' sovereignty, on the other – most states
voluntarily and deliberately limit the scope of their sovereignty'.[27]
• Informational – increase in information flows between geographically remote locations.
Arguably this is a technological change with the advent of fibre optic communications,
satellites, and increased availability of telephone and Internet.
• Language – the most spoken first language is Mandarin (845 million speakers) followed
by Spanish (329 million speakers) and English (328 million speakers).[28] However the
most popular second language is undoubtedly English, the "lingua franca" of
globalization:
○ About 35% of the world's mail, telexes, and cables are in English.
○ Approximately 40% of the world's radio programs are in English.
○ English is the dominant language on the Internet.[29]
• Competition – Survival in the new global business market calls for improved productivity
and increased competition. Due to the market becoming worldwide, companies in various
industries have to upgrade their products and use technology skilfully in order to face
increased competition.[30]
• Ecological – the advent of global environmental challenges that might be solved with
international cooperation, such as climate change, cross-boundary water and air pollution,
over-fishing of the ocean, and the spread of invasive species. Since many factories are
built in developing countries with less environmental regulation, globalism and free trade
may increase pollution and impact on precious fresh water resources(Hoekstra and
Chapagain 2008).[31] On the other hand, economic development historically required a
"dirty" industrial stage, and it is argued that developing countries should not, via
regulation, be prohibited from increasing their standard of living.

London is a city of considerable diversity. As of 2008, estimates were published that stated that
approximately 30% of London's total population was from an ethnic minority group. The latest
official figures show that in 2008, 590,000 people arrived to live in the UK whilst 427,000 left,
meaning that net inward migration was 163,000.[32]
• Cultural – growth of cross-cultural contacts; advent of new categories of consciousness
and identities which embodies cultural diffusion, the desire to increase one's standard of
living and enjoy foreign products and ideas, adopt new technology and practices, and
participate in a "world culture".[33] Some bemoan the resulting consumerism and loss of
languages. Also see Transformation of culture.
○ Spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity
(e.g. through the export of Hollywood). Some consider such "imported" culture a
danger, since it may supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity or
even assimilation. Others consider multiculturalism to promote peace and
understanding between people. A third position that gained popularity is the
notion that multiculturalism to a new form of monoculture in which no
distinctions exist and everyone shifts between various lifestyles in terms of music,
cloth and other aspects once more firmly attached to a single culture. Thus not
mere cultural assimilation as mentioned above but the obliteration of culture as
we know it today.[34][35] In reality, as it happens in countries like the United
Kingdom, Canada, Australia or New Zealand, people who always lived in their
native countries maintain their cultures without feeling forced by any reason to
accept another and are proud of it even when they're acceptive of immigrants,
while people who are newly arrived simply keep their own culture or part of it
despite some minimum amount of assimilation, although aspects of their culture
often become a curiosity and a daily aspect of the lives of the people of the
welcoming countries.
○ Greater international travel and tourism. WHO estimates that up to 500,000
people are on planes at any one time.[citation needed][36] In 2008, there were over 922
million international tourist arrivals, with a growth of 1.9% as compared to 2007.
[37]

○ Greater immigration,[38] including illegal immigration.[39] The IOM estimates there

are more than 200 million migrants around the world today.[40] Newly available
data show that remittance flows to developing countries reached $328 billion in
2008.[41]
○ Spread of local consumer products (e.g., food) to other countries (often adapted to
their culture).
○ Worldwide fads and pop culture such as Pokémon, Sudoku, Numa Numa,
Origami, Idol series, YouTube, Orkut, Facebook, and MySpace; accessible only
to those who have Internet or Television, leaving out a substantial portion of the
Earth's population.
The construction of continental hotels is a major consequence of globalization process in
affiliation with tourism and travel industry, Dariush Grand Hotel, Kish, Iran
•
○ Worldwide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games.
○ Incorporation of multinational corporations into new media. As the sponsors of
the All-Blacks rugby team, Adidas had created a parallel website with a
downloadable interactive rugby game for its fans to play and compete.[42]
• Social – development of the system of non-governmental organisations as main
agents of global public policy, including humanitarian aid and developmental
efforts.[43]
• Technical
○ Development of a Global Information System, global telecommunications
infrastructure and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the
Internet, communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless
telephones
○ Increase in the number of standards applied globally; e.g., copyright laws, patents
and world trade agreements.
• Legal/Ethical
○ The creation of the international criminal court and international justice
movements.
○ Crime importation and raising awareness of global crime-fighting efforts and
cooperation.
○ The emergence of Global administrative law.
• Religious
○ The spread and increased interrelations of various religious groups, ideas, and
practices and their ideas of the meanings and values of particular spaces.[44]
[edit] Cultural effects

Globalization has influenced the use of language across the world. This street in Hong Kong, a
former British colony, shows various signs, a few of which incorporate both Chinese and British
English.
Japanese McDonald's fast food as evidence of corporate globalization and the integration of the
same into different cultures.
"Culture" is defined as patterns of human activity and the symbols that give these activities
significance. According to prevailing notions, globalization has 'joined' different cultures and
turned them into something different.[45] The dominant view stresses that globalization should be
distinguished from Americanization. This approach has been used since the late 1980s to conceal
the unidirectional, top-down character of US-led globalization as it was being relentlessly
imposed on the rest of the world. Recently, this view has been challenged by highlighting
globalization's irradiating pattern as largely derived from decisions originally taken in
Washington, D.C., particularly in the economic and cultural fields.[46]
Culinary culture has become extensively globalized. For example, Japanese noodles, Swedish
meatballs, Indian curry and French cheese have become popular outside their countries of origin.
Two American companies, McDonald's and Starbucks, are often cited as examples of
globalization, with over 31,000 and 18,000 locations operating worldwide, respectively.
Another common practice brought about by globalization is the usage of Chinese characters in
tattoos. These tattoos are popular with today's youth despite the lack of social acceptance of
tattoos in China.[47] Also, there is a lack of comprehension in the meaning of Chinese characters
that people get,[48] making this an example of cultural appropriation.
The internet breaks down cultural boundaries across the world by enabling easy, near-
instantaneous communication between people anywhere in a variety of digital forms and media.
The Internet is associated with the process of cultural globalization because it allows interaction
and communication between people with very different lifestyles and from very different
cultures. Photo sharing websites allow interaction even where language would otherwise be a
barrier.
[edit] Democratizing effect of communications
Exchange of information via the internet is playing a major role in the democratization of many
countries.[49]
Virtualization of industries since the dawn of ecommerce has transferred the power to the buyer,
and the same effect has transitioned into voting systems by the groupin effect of social media.
[edit] Economic liberalization
Further information: Neoliberalism
According to Jagdish Bhagwati, a former adviser to the U.N. on globalization, although there are
obvious problems with overly-rapid development, globalization is a very positive force that lifts
countries out of poverty. According to him, it causes a virtuous economic cycle associated with
faster economic growth.[50]
Workers in developing countries now have more occupational choices then ever before.
Educated workers in developing countries are able to compete on the global job market for high
paying jobs. Production workers in developing countries are not only able to compete, they have
a strong advantage over their counterparts in the industrialized world.[51] This translates into
increased opportunity. Workers have the choice of emigrating and taking jobs in industrial
countries or staying at home to work in outsourced industries. In addition, the global economy
provides a market for the products of cottage industry, providing more opportunities.[50]
Globalization has generated significant international opposition over concerns that it has
increased inequality and environmental degradation.[52] In the Midwestern United States,
globalization has eaten away at its competitive edge in industry and agriculture, lowering the
quality of life.[53]
Some also view the effect of globalization on culture as a rising concern. Along with
globalization of economies and trade, culture is being imported and exported as well. The
concern is that the stronger, bigger countries such as the United States, may overrun the other,
smaller countries' cultures, leading to those customs and values fading away. This process is also
sometimes referred to as Americanization or McDonaldization. [54]
[edit] Jobs
[edit] Income inequality
The globalization of the job market has had negative consequences in developed countries.
“Mind workers” (engineers, attorneys, scientists, professors, executives, journalists, consultants)
are able to compete successfully in the world market and command high wages. Conversely,
production workers and service workers in industrialized nations are unable to compete directly
with workers in third world countries.[24] workflow changes so that poor countries gain the low-
value-added element of work formerly done in rich countries, whilst higher-value work is
retained; for instance, the total number of people employed in manufacturing in the USA
declined, but there were great increases in value added per worker.[55]
This has resulted in a growing gap between the incomes of the rich and poor. This trend seems to
be greater in the United States than other industrial countries. Income inequality in the United
States started to rise in the late 1970,’s, however the rate of increase rose sharply in the 21st
century; it has now reached a level comparable with that found in developing countries.[56] (Cf.
The impact of the information age on the workforce)
[edit] Brain drains
Opportunities in rich countries drives talent away from poor countries, leading to brain drains.
Brain drain has cost the African continent over $4.1 billion in the employment of 150,000
expatriate professionals annually.[57] The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry
(Assocham) estimates that the brain drain of Indian students cost India $10 billion per year.[58]
A maquila in Mexico
[edit] Sweatshops
In many poorer nations, globalization is the result of foreign businesses utilizing workers in a
country to take advantage of the lower wage rates.
One example used by anti-globalization protestors is the use of sweatshops by manufacturers.
According to Global Exchange these "Sweat Shops" are widely used by sports shoe
manufacturers and mentions one company in particular – Nike.[59] There are factories set up in
the poor countries where employees agree to work for lower wages than would be required in
richer countries.
Several agencies have been set up worldwide specifically designed to focus on anti-sweatshop
campaigns and education of such. In the USA, the National Labor Committee has proposed a
number of bills as part of Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act, which have
thus far failed in Congress. The legislation would legally require companies to respect human
and worker rights by prohibiting the import, sale, or export of sweatshop goods.[60]
Specifically, these core standards include no child labor, no forced labor, freedom of association,
right to organize and bargain collectively, as well as the right to decent working conditions.[61]
[edit] Business process outsourcing
Main article: Business process outsourcing
In the rich world, business process outsourcing has, like most other arms of globalisation, been a
double-edged sword; it enables cheaper services but displaces some service-sector jobs.
However, in poorer countries to which service jobs are outsourced, the benefits have been
unambiguous; in India, the outsourcing industry is the "primary engine of the country’s
development over the next few decades, contributing broadly to GDP growth, employment
growth, and poverty alleviation".[62][63]
[edit] Natural resources
[edit] Air
In 2007, China surpassed the United States as the top emitter of CO2.[64] Only 1 percent of the
country’s 560 million city inhabitants (2007) breathe air deemed safe by the European Union.
Burning forest in Brazil. The removal of forest to make way for cattle ranching was the leading
cause of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon from the mid 1960s. Recently,[when?] soybeans
have become one of the most important contributors to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.[65]
[edit] Forests
A major source of deforestation is the logging industry, driven spectacularly by China and Japan.
[66]
China and India are quickly becoming large oil consumers.[67][68] China has seen oil
consumption grow by 8% yearly since 2002, doubling from 1996–2006.[69] State of the World
2006 report said the two countries' high economic growth hid a reality of severe pollution. The
report states:
The world's ecological capacity is simply insufficient to satisfy the ambitions of China,
India, Japan, Europe and the United States as well as the aspirations of the rest of the
world in a sustainable way[70]
At present rates, tropical rainforests in Indonesia would be logged out in 10 years, Papua New
Guinea in 13 to 16 years.[71]
[edit] Minerals
Without more recycling, zinc could be used up by 2037, both indium and hafnium could run out
by 2017, and terbium could be gone before 2012.[72] In a 2006 news story, BBC reported, "...if
China and India were to consume as much resources per capita as United States or Japan in 2030
together they would require a full planet Earth to meet their needs.[70] In the longterm these
effects can lead to increased conflict over dwindling resources[73] and in the worst case a
Malthusian catastrophe.
[edit] Effects of population growth on food supplies
The head of the International Food Policy Research Institute, stated in 2008 that the gradual
change in diet among newly prosperous populations is the most important factor underpinning
the rise in global food prices.[74] From 1950 to 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed
agriculture around the world, grain production increased by over 250%.[75] The world population
has grown by about 4 billion since the beginning of the Green Revolution and most believe that,
without the Revolution, there would be greater famine and malnutrition than the UN presently
documents (approximately 850 million people suffering from chronic malnutrition in 2005).[76][77]
It is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain food security in a world beset by a confluence of
"peak" phenomena, namely peak oil, peak water, peak phosphorus, peak grain and peak fish.
Growing populations, falling energy sources and food shortages will create the "perfect storm"
by 2030, according to the UK government chief scientist. He said food reserves are at a 50-year
low but the world requires 50% more energy, food and water by 2030.[78][79] The world will have
to produce 70% more food by 2050 to feed a projected extra 2.3 billion people and as incomes
rise, the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) warned.[80] Social scientists
have warned of the possibility that global civilization is due for a period of contraction and
economic re-localization, due to the decline in fossil fuels and resulting crisis in transportation
and food production.[81][82][83] One paper even suggested that the future might even bring about a
restoration of sustainable local economic activities based on hunting and gathering, shifting
horticulture, and pastoralism.[84]
In 2003, 29% of open sea fisheries were in a state of collapse.[85] The journal Science published a
four-year study in November 2006, which predicted that, at prevailing trends, the world would
run out of wild-caught seafood in 2048.[86]
[edit] Health
Further information: Globalization and disease
Globalization has also helped to spread some of the deadliest infectious diseases known to
humans.[87] Starting in Asia, the Black Death killed at least one-third of Europe's population in
the 14th century.[88] Even worse devastation was inflicted on the American supercontinent by
European arrivals. 90% of the populations of the civilizations of the "New World" such as the
Aztec, Maya, and Inca were killed by small pox brought by European colonization. Modern
modes of transportation allow more people and products to travel around the world at a faster
pace, but they also open the airways to the transcontinental movement of infectious disease
vectors.[89] One example of this occurring is AIDS/HIV.[90] Due to immigration, approximately
500,000 people in the United States are believed to be infected with Chagas disease.[91] In 2006,
the tuberculosis (TB) rate among foreign-born persons in the United States was 9.5 times that of
U.S.-born persons.[92]
[edit] Global market
[edit] Expansion
A flood of consumer goods such as televisions, radios, bicycles, and textiles into the United
States, Europe, and Japan has helped fuel the economic expansion of Asian tiger economies in
recent decades.[93] However, Chinese textile and clothing exports have recently[when?] encountered
criticism from Europe, the United States and some African countries.[94][95] As of April 26, 2005
Asia Times article notes that, "In regional giant South Africa, some 300,000 textile workers have
lost their jobs in the past two years due to the influx of Chinese goods".[96] The increasing U.S.
trade deficit with China has cost 2.4 million American jobs between 2001 and 2008, according to
a study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).[97] From 2000 to 2007, the United States had lost
a total of 3.2 million manufacturing jobs.[98]
A report issued in 2007 by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP predicted that by 2050 the economies
of the E7 emerging economies (the BRIC countries: China, India, Brazil, and Russia, plus
Indonesia and Turkey) will be around 50% larger than the current G7 (US, Japan, Germany, UK,
France, Italy and Canada). China is expected to overtake the US as the largest economy around
2025, while India will overtake the US in 2050.[99] A more recent report isued by Goldman Sachs
that was compiled after China released their GDP growth figures for 2009 predicted that China is
about to overtake Japan and may become the world's largest economy by 2020.[100] (See the entry
on BRIC for more details)
[edit] Financial interdependency
The world today is so interconnected that the collapse of the subprime mortgage market in the
U.S. has led to a global financial crisis and recession on a scale not seen since the Great
Depression.[101] According to critics, government deregulation and failed regulation of Wall
Street's investment banks were important contributors to the subprime mortgage crisis.[102][103]
[edit] Drug and illicit goods trade
The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) issued a report that the global drug
trade generates more than $320 billion a year in revenues.[104] Worldwide, the UN estimates there
are more than 50 million regular users of heroin, cocaine and synthetic drugs.[105] The
international trade of endangered species is second only to drug trafficking.[106] Traditional
Chinese medicine often incorporates ingredients from all parts of plants, the leaf, stem, flower,
root, and also ingredients from animals and minerals. The use of parts of endangered species
(such as seahorses, rhinoceros horns, saiga antelope horns, and tiger bones and claws) has
created controversy and resulted in a black market of poachers who hunt restricted animals.[107]
[108]

[edit] Debate
See also: Alter-globalization, Participatory economics, and Global Justice Movement
In recent years, debates about globalization have tended to descend into polemics and confusion
as opinions have become increasingly politicized. There is little common ground between
proponents and opponents of globalization.[109]
[edit] Politicization in the United States
The study by Peer Foiimkomjlss and Paul Hirsch suggests that the politicization of this discourse
has emerged largely in response to greater US involvement with the international economy. For
example, their survey shows that in 1993 more than 40% of respondents were unfamiliar with the
concept of globalization. When the survey was repeated in 1998, 89% of the respondents had a
polarized view of globalization as being either good or bad.[110] At the same time, discourse on
globalization, which was at first confined largely to the financial community, started to focus
instead on an increasingly heated debate between proponents of globalization and a dipartite
group of disenchanted students and workers. Polarization increased dramatically after the
establishment of the WTO in 1995; this event and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-
globalization movement.[111]
Their study shows that, the neutral frame was the dominant frame in newspapers articles and
corporate press releases prior to 1989. Both media depicted globalization as a natural
development that related to technological advancement. In 1986, for example, nearly 90% of
newspaper articles exhibited neutral framing. The situation started to change after the collapse of
the stock market in Oct.19, 1987 and the subsequent recession. Newspapers began to voice
concerns about the trend toward “globalization” and the interconnectedness of international
financial markets. By 1989, the number of positively and negatively framed articles had eclipsed
the number of neutrally framed articles. By 1998, neutrally framed articles had been reduced to
25% of the total.
The study also shows an especially large increase in the number of negatively framed articles.
Prior to 1995, positively framed articles were more common than negatively framed articles,
however, by 1998, the number of negatively framed articles was double that of positively framed
articles.[112] A recent article in the Wall Street Journal[113] suggests that this rise in opposition to
globalization can be explained, at least in part, by economic self-interest.
Initially, college educated workers were the most likely to support globalization. Less educated
workers, who were more likely to compete with immigrants and workers in developing
countries, tended to oppose globalization. The situation changed radically when white collar
workers started to blame immigration and globalization for their own increased economic
insecurity. According to a poll conducted for the Wall Street Journal and NBC News, in 1997,
58% of college graduates said globalization had been good for the U.S. while 30% said it had
been bad. When the poll asked a similar question in 2008 (after the financial crisis of 2007), 47%
of graduates thought globalization was bad and only 33% thought it was good. Respondents with
high school education, who were always opposed to globalization, became more opposed.[114]
[edit] Other industrialized countries
Philip Gordon, in a recent article in Yale Global, states that “(as of 2004) a clear majority of
Europeans believe that globalization can enrich their lives, while believing the European Union
can help them take advantage of globalization’s benefits while shielding them from its negative
effects.” [115] The main opposition consists of left-wing socialists, environmental groups, and
right-wing nationalists.
Part of the reason for the difference in response to globalization in US and EU lies in the fact that
workers in the US have been more strongly impacted by factors like automation and outsourcing
than their European counterparts. Income Inequality in the US, for example, is now much higher
than in the EU.[116] Gordon points out that workers in the EU feel less threatened by
globalization. First, the job market in the EU is more stable than that of the US, and workers in
the EU are less likely to accept wage cuts or loss of benefits. Second, social spending by
governments in the EU is much higher than in the US. The situation is very different in the US,
where there is a strong sense of individualism.[117]
In Japan, the debate takes a different form. According to Takenaka Heizo and Chida Ryokichi,
there is a perception that the economy is “Small and Frail”, which seems ironic in a country that
accounts for one-quarter of all production. However Japan is resource poor and must promote
exports in order to import the raw materials it needs. Anxiety over their position has caused
terms like internationalization and globalization to become part of everyday language in Japan.
The Japanese accept that internationalization and globalization cannot be avoided. However,
their resource dependency requires them to be as self-sufficient as possible in sectors like
agriculture. Most discourse, therefore, centers on the notion of self-sufficiency.[118]
The situation may have changed after the financial crisis of 2007. A recent BBC World
Public Poll taken between October 31, 2007 and January 25, 2008, suggests that opposition to
globalization in industrialized countries may be increasing. Unfortunately, it is difficult to
compare the results with the polls mentioned above; those polls asked whether the overall effect
of globalization was good or bad, whereas the BBC poll asked whether globalization was
growing too rapidly. The countries where people are most likely say that globalization is
growing too fast are France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, and Germany. There is even the
suggestion that the trend in these countries is even stronger than in the United States.[119] The poll
also correlates the tendency to view globalization as proceeding too rapidly with a perception of
growing economic insecurity and social inequality.
[edit] Developing world
A number of international polls have shown that residents of developing countries tend to view
globalization more favorably than residents of the US or the EU[120] However, a recent poll
undertaken by the BBC indicates that there is a growing feeling in the Third World that
globalization is proceeding too rapidly. There are only a few countries, including Mexico, the
countries of Central America, Indonesia, Brazil and Kenya, where a majority felt that
globalization is growing too slowly.[121]
Many in the Third World see globalization is a positive force that lifts countries out of poverty.
[122]
The opposition often combines environmental concerns with nationalism. Governments are
often seen as agents of neo-colonialism that open the doors to an invasion of multinational
corporations.[123] Much of this criticism comes from the established middle class; a report from
the Brookings Institute suggests this is because the middle class perceive upwardly-mobile low-
income groups to be a threat to their economic security.[124]
Although many critics blame globalization for a decline of the middle class in industrialized
countries, a recent report in The Economist suggests that the middle class is growing rapidly in
the Third World.[125] Unfortunately, this growth, coupled with growing urbanization, has led to
increasing disparities in wealth between urban and rural areas.[126] This leads to a situation where
those who have gained the least economically have the most to lose from the negative
environmental impact of globalization. For example, in India 70% of the population lives in
rural areas and depend directly on access to natural resources for their livelihood.[123] As a result,
anti-globalization often takes the form of mass movements in the countryside.[127]
The situation is critical in China, where rapid growth has led to a situation where 0.4% of the
population possess 70% of the nation’s wealth.[128] An 2007 article in The Economist blamed
increasing unrest in rural China on the growing gap in wealth between rural and urban areas.[129]
This, plus growing worker discontent in industrialized areas,.[130] has caused a great deal of
concern among the nation's leadership
[edit] Alternative interpretations
The analysis presented above focuses on the politicization of discourse and the way politically
motivated actors represent globalization to the public; it is more interested in the process of
politicization than in the meanings of globalization. It is also possible to examine discourse on
globalization in terms of these meanings and their implications for the understanding issues like
national autonomy and sovereignty.
For example, David Held and Anthony McGrew, in an article in The Oxford Companion to
Politics of the World, have suggested that this discourse can be separated into three frames. 1)
Hyperglobalists hold that autonomy and sovereignty of nation-states have been eclipsed by
contemporary processes of economic globalization. 2) Sceptics hold that intensity of
contemporary global interdependence is considerably exaggerated and that the hyperglobalists
ignore the continued primacy of national power and sovereignty. 3) Transformationalists
emphasize the way in which globalization has brought about the spatial re-organization and re-
articulation of economic, political, military and cultural power.[131]
Peer Fiss and Paul Hirsch, in an article on the discourse of globalization, suggested using the
notion of framing as a way to study this polarization. By framing, they mean the way “interested
actors and entrepreneurs articulate particular versions of reality to potential supporters…” [132]
They identified three main frames:
1) The positive frame points to the potential gains and benefits of globalization.
2) The neutral frame portrays globalization as a natural, evolutionary, and largely inevitable
development. This discourse, which is associated with the financial community, avoids making
moral judgments.
3) The negative frame points out the increasing potential for economic crisis, the threat to the
livelihoods of workers, and the growing income inequality caused by globalization. This frame
also includes discourse which is primarily concerned with the negative impact of globalization in
the Third World.
To which we should add a fourth, newly emergent frame:
4) The constructive frame is an emerging frame that is more positive and constructive than the
negative frame. This discourse supports global cooperation and interaction while opposing some
of the negative effects of globalization.[citation needed]
[edit] Advocates
1) Neo-Liberalism
The majority of books, newspaper articles and press releases in this frame represent the neo-
liberal view of globalization. Supporters of free trade claim that it increases economic prosperity
as well as opportunity, especially among developing nations, enhances civil liberties and leads to
a more efficient allocation of resources. Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest
that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the
trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower prices, more employment, higher output and a
higher standard of living for those in developing countries.[133][134]
Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism, and some libertarians, say that higher degrees of political
and economic freedom in the form of democracy and capitalism in the developed world are ends
in themselves and also produce higher levels of material wealth. They see globalization as the
beneficial spread of liberty and capitalism.[133]
Supporters of democratic globalization are sometimes called pro-globalists. They believe that the
first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be followed by a phase of
building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens.
2) Global Village
An optimistic view of globalism is suggested by Marshall McLuhan’s of the Global Village [135]
This view suggests that globalization will lead to a world where people from all countries will
become more integrated and aware of common interests and shared humanity.[136]
3) Importance of international cooperation
A third body of literature points out the value of international cooperation in solving problems of
mutual concern ranging from human-rights issues to environmental concerns such as global
warming. This view is similar to that represented by the constructive frame.
4) World government
Dr. Francesco Stipo, Director of the United States Association of the Club of Rome, writes in
favor of political globalization in the form of a world government, suggests that it "should reflect
the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not
supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and
the world authority would have power within their sphere of competence".[137]
Some, such as former Canadian Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as
inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly elected United Nations
Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.
[edit] Practical approach
This involves a form of discourse that portrays globalization as a natural, evolutionary, and
largely inevitable development. This type of discourse, which is characteristic of the financial
community, has become less prominent as the issue of globalization has become increasingly
politicized. For example, a study of newspaper articles has shown that the percentage of articles
exhibiting neutral framing decreased from nearly 90% in 1986 to around 25% in 1998.[132] It
should be noted, however, that the number of newspaper articles dealing with globalization
increased almost tenfold during that period.[138] Therefore, the total number of neutral articles has
probably increased.
Examples of literature associated with this frame would include textbooks, books on
international finance, and articles on globalization found in financial journals like the Wall Street
Journal.
[edit] Critics
Since 1991, this discourse has been increasing rapidly in importance in the United states; the
number of newspaper articles showing negative framing rose from about 10% of the total in
1991 to 55% of the total in 1999. This increase occurred during a period when the total number
of articles concerning globalization nearly doubled. [112] This discourse takes two very different
forms:
1) Concern over economic well being in developed countries
In industrialized countries discourse about globalization centers on economic self-interest.
Newspaper articles about globalization typically express concerns involve the interconnectedness
of international financial markets and the potential for economic crisis, as well as threats to the
livelihood of workers.[132]
2) Concern over the impact of globalization in developing countries
The establishment of the WTO in 1995 and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-
globalization movement that is primarily concerned with the negative impact of globalization in
developing countries. Their concerns range from environmental issues to issues like democracy,
national sovereignty and the exploitation of workers. (See the following discussion on the anti-
globalization movement).
Individuals who associate themselves with the anti-globalization movement in industrialized
countries comprise a relatively small but vocal minority. They are disproportionately middle-
class and college-educated. This contrasts sharply with the situation in developing countries,
where the anti-globalization movement has been more successful in achieving a broader, more
balanced social class composition, with millions of workers and farmers getting actively
involved.[139]
[edit] Common ground
This discourse involves a synthesis combining elements of all three of the above forms. It is
practical, insofar as it accepts the reality of international integration and attempts to work within
it. It is positive in that it believes that international cooperation can provide solutions to
important problems. At the same time, it recognizes the negative aspects of globalization and
proposes ways to mitigate their impact.
Beginning in 2001 with the World Social Forum (WSF), there has been a movement consisting
of individuals trying to bring about this type of synthesis. It is associated with the term Alter-
globalization (or altermondialization), a positive spin on the term anti-globalization. Members
of this movement support the international integration of globalization, but demand that values of
democracy, economic justice, environmental protection, and human rights be put ahead of purely
economic concerns. This movement is discussed at length in the section Alter-globalization.
[edit] Anti-globalization movement
Main article: Anti-globalization movement
See also: Alter-globalization, Participatory economics, and Global Justice Movement
"Anti-globalization" can involve the process or actions taken by a state or its people in order to
demonstrate its sovereignty and practice democratic decision-making. Anti-globalization may
occur in order to maintain barriers to the international transfer of people, goods and beliefs,
particularly free market deregulation, encouraged by business organizations and organizations
such as the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization. Moreover, as Naomi
Klein argues in her book No Logo, anti-globalism can denote either a single social movement or
an umbrella term that encompasses a number of separate social movements[140] such as
nationalists and socialists.
Some people who are labeled "anti-globalist" or "sceptics" (Hirst and Thompson)[141] consider the
term to be too vague and inaccurate.[142][143] Podobnik states that "the vast majority of groups that
participate in these protests draw on international networks of support, and they generally call for
forms of globalization that enhance democratic representation, human rights, and
egalitarianism."
Joseph Stiglitz and Andrew Charlton write:[144]

Some members aligned with this viewpoint prefer instead to describe themselves as the "Global
Justice Movement", the "Anti-Corporate-Globalization Movement", the "Movement of
Movements" (a popular term in Italy), the "Alter-globalization" movement (popular in France),
the "Counter-Globalization" movement, and a number of other terms.
Critiques of the current wave of economic globalization typically look at both the damage to the
planet, in terms of the perceived unsustainable harm done to the biosphere, as well as the
perceived human costs, such as poverty, inequality, miscegenation, injustice and the erosion of
traditional culture which, the critics contend, all occur as a result of the economic
transformations related to globalization. They challenge directly the metrics, such as GDP, used
to measure progress promulgated by institutions such as the World Bank, and look to other
measures, such as the Happy Planet Index,[145] created by the New Economics Foundation.[146]
They point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequences–social disintegration, a
breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread
of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"[147] which they claim are the unintended but
very real consequences of globalization.
The terms globalization and anti-globalization are used in various ways. Noam Chomsky
believes that[148][149]
Critics argue that globalization results in:
• Poorer countries suffering disadvantages: While it is true that globalization encourages
free trade among countries, there are also negative consequences because some countries
try to save their national markets. The main export of poorer countries is usually
agricultural goods. Larger countries often subsidise their farmers (like the EU Common
Agricultural Policy), which lowers the market price for the poor farmer's crops compared
to what it would be under free trade.[150] (See Agricultural subsidy for more information.)
• The exploitation of foreign impoverished workers: The deterioration of protections for
weaker nations by stronger industrialized powers has resulted in the exploitation of the
people in those nations to become cheap labor. Due to the lack of protections, companies
from powerful industrialized nations are able to offer workers enough salary to entice
them to endure extremely long hours and unsafe working conditions, though economists
question if consenting workers in a competitive employers' market can be decried as
"exploited". It is true that the workers are free to leave their jobs, but in many poorer
countries, this would mean starvation for the worker, and possible even his/her family if
their previous jobs were unavailable.[151]
• The shift to outsourcing: Globalization has allowed corporations to move manufacturing
and service jobs from high cost locations to locations with the lowest wages and worker
benefits. This results in loss of jobs in the high cost locations whilst creating great
economic opportunities in poorer countries.[62]
• Weak labor unions: The surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever growing number of
companies in transition has caused a weakening of labor unions in the United States.
Unions lose their effectiveness when their membership begins to decline. As a result
unions hold less power over corporations that are able to easily replace workers, often for
lower wages, and have the option to not offer unionized jobs anymore.[150]
• An increase in exploitation of child labor: for example, a country that experiencing
increases in labor demand because of globalization and an increase the demand for goods
produced by children, will experience greater a demand for child labor. This can be
"hazardous" or "exploitive", e.g., quarrying, salvage, cash cropping but also includes the
trafficking of children, children in bondage or forced labor, prostitution, pornography and
other illicit activities.[152]
In December 2007, World Bank economist Branko Milanovic has called much previous
empirical research on global poverty and inequality into question because, according to him,
improved estimates of purchasing power parity indicate that developing countries are worse off
than previously believed. Milanovic remarks that "literally hundreds of scholarly papers on
convergence or divergence of countries’ incomes have been published in the last decade based
on what we know now were faulty numbers." With the new data, possibly economists will revise
calculations, and he also believed that there are considerable implications estimates of global
inequality and poverty levels. Global inequality was estimated at around 65 Gini points, whereas
the new numbers indicate global inequality to be at 70 on the Gini scale.[153]
The critics of globalization typically emphasize that globalization is a process that is mediated
according to corporate interests, and typically raise the possibility of alternative global
institutions and policies, which they believe address the moral claims of poor and working
classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way.[154]
The movement includes church groups, national liberation factions, peasant unionists,
intellectuals, artists, protectionists, anarchists, those in support of relocalization and others. Some
are reformist, (arguing for a more moderate form of capitalism) while others are more
revolutionary (arguing for what they believe is a more humane system than capitalism) and
others are reactionary, believing globalization destroys national industry and jobs.
One of the key points made by critics of recent economic globalization is that income inequality,
both between and within nations, is increasing as a result of these processes. One article from
2001 found that significantly, in 7 out of 8 metrics, income inequality has increased in the twenty
years ending 2001. Also, "incomes in the lower deciles of world income distribution have
probably fallen absolutely since the 1980s". Furthermore, the World Bank's figures on absolute
poverty were challenged. The article was skeptical of the World Bank's claim that the number of
people living on less than $1 a day has held steady at 1.2 billion from 1987 to 1998, because of
biased methodology.[155]
A chart that gave the inequality a very visible and comprehensible form, the so-called
'champagne glass' effect,[156] was contained in the 1992 United Nations Development Program
Report, which showed the distribution of global income to be very uneven, with the richest 20%
of the world's population controlling 82.7% of the world's income.[157]
Distribution of world GDP, 1989
Quintile of Population Income
Richest 20% 82.7%
Second 20% 11.7%
Third 20% 2.3%
Fourth 20% 2.4%
Poorest 20% 0.2%
Source: United Nations Development Program. 1992 Human Development Report[158]
Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with
more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.[159]
Americanization related to a period of high political American clout and of significant growth of
America's shops, markets and object being brought into other countries. So globalization, a much
more diversified phenomenon, relates to a multilateral political world and to the increase of
objects, markets and so on into each others countries.
Critics of globalization talk of Westernization. A 2005 UNESCO report[160] showed that cultural
exchange is becoming more frequent from Eastern Asia but Western countries are still the main
exporters of cultural goods. In 2002, China was the third largest exporter of cultural goods, after
the UK and US. Between 1994 and 2002, both North America's and the European Union's shares
of cultural exports declined, while Asia's cultural exports grew to surpass North America.
Related factors are the fact that Asia's population and area are several times that of North
America.
Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as the promotion of corporatist interests.
[161]
They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of corporate entities shapes the
political policy of countries.[162][163]
[edit] History
Extent of the Silk Road and Spice trade routes blocked by the Ottoman Empire in 1453 spurring
exploration
The historical origins of globalization are the subject of on-going debate. Though several
scholars situate the origins of globalization in the modern era, others regard it as a phenomenon
with a long history. Some authors have argued that stretching the beginning of globalization far
back in time renders the concept wholly inoperative and useless for political analysis. .[164]
Thomas L. Friedman divides the history of globalization into three periods: Globalization 1
(1492–1800), Globalization 2 (1800–2000) and Globalization 3 (2000–present). He states that
Globalization 1 involved the globalization of countries, Globalization 2 involved the
globalization of companies and Globalization 3 involves the globalization of individuals.[165]
Perhaps the most extreme proponent of a deep historical origin for globalization was Andre
Gunder Frank, an economist associated with dependency theory. Frank argued that a form of
globalization has been in existence since the rise of trade links between Sumer and the Indus
Valley Civilization in the third millennium B.C.[166] Critics of this idea contend that it rests upon
an over-broad definition of globalization.
An early form of globalized economics and culture existed during the Hellenistic Age, when
commercialized urban centers were focused around the axis of Greek culture over a wide range
that stretched from India to Spain, with such cities as Alexandria, Athens, and Antioch at its
center. Trade was widespread during that period, and it is the first time the idea of a
cosmopolitan culture (from Greek "Cosmopolis", meaning "world city") emerged. Others have
perceived an early form of globalization in the trade links between the Roman Empire, the
Parthian Empire, and the Han Dynasty. The increasing articulation of commercial links between
these powers inspired the development of the Silk Road, which started in western China, reached
the boundaries of the Parthian empire, and continued onwards towards Rome.[167] With 300
Greek ships a year sailing between the Greco-Roman world and India, the annual trade may have
reached 300,000 tons.[168]
The Islamic Golden Age was also an important early stage of globalization, when Jewish and
Muslim traders and explorers established a sustained economy across the Old World resulting in
a globalization of crops, trade, knowledge and technology. Globally significant crops such as
sugar and cotton became widely cultivated across the Muslim world in this period, while the
necessity of learning Arabic and completing the Hajj created a cosmopolitan culture.[169]
Portuguese carrack in Nagasaki, 17th century Japanese Nanban art

Native New World crops exchanged globally: Maize, Tomato, Potato, Vanilla, Rubber, Cacao,
Tobacco
The advent of the Mongol Empire, though destabilizing to the commercial centers of the Middle
East and China, greatly facilitated travel along the Silk Road. This permitted travelers and
missionaries such as Marco Polo to journey successfully (and profitably) from one end of
Eurasia to the other. The so-called Pax Mongolica of the thirteenth century had several other
notable globalizing effects. It witnessed the creation of the first international postal service, as
well as the rapid transmission of epidemic diseases such as bubonic plague across the newly
unified regions of Central Asia.[170] These pre-modern phases of global or hemispheric exchange
are sometimes known as archaic globalization. Up to the sixteenth century, however, even the
largest systems of international exchange were limited to the Old World.
The Age of Discovery brought a broad change in globalization, being the first period in which
Eurasia and Africa engaged in substantial cultural, material and biologic exchange with the New
World.[171] It began in the late 15th century, when the two Kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula –
Portugal and Castile – sent the first exploratory voyages[172] around the Horn of Africa and to the
Americas, "discovered" in 1492 by Christopher Columbus. Shortly before the turn of the 16th
century, Portuguese started establishing trading posts (factories) from Africa to Asia and Brazil,
to deal with the trade of local products like gold, spices and timber, introducing an international
business center under a royal monopoly, the House of India.[173]
Global integration continued with the European colonization of the Americas initiating the
Columbian Exchange,[174] the enormous widespread exchange of plants, animals, foods, human
populations (including slaves), communicable diseases, and culture between the Eastern and
Western hemispheres. It was one of the most significant global events concerning ecology,
agriculture, and culture in history. New crops that had come from the Americas via the European
seafarers in the 16th century significantly contributed to the world's population growth.[175]
This phase is sometimes known as proto-globalization. It was characterized by the rise of
maritime European empires, in the 16th and 17th centuries, first the Portuguese and Spanish
Empires, and later the Dutch and British Empires. In the 17th century, globalization became also
a private business phenomenon when chartered companies like British East India Company
(founded in 1600), often described as the first multinational corporation, as well as the Dutch
East India Company (founded in 1602) were established.

Animated map showing Colonial empires evolution from 1492 to present

19th century Great Britain become the first global economic superpower, because of superior
manufacturing technology and improved global communications such as steamships and
railroads.
The 19th century witnessed the advent of globalization approaching its modern form.
Industrialization allowed cheap production of household items using economies of scale, while
rapid population growth created sustained demand for commodities. Globalization in this period
was decisively shaped by nineteenth-century imperialism. After the Opium Wars and the
completion of British conquest of India, vast populations of these regions became ready
consumers of European exports. It was in this period that areas of sub-Saharan Africa and the
Pacific islands were incorporated into the world system. Meanwhile, the conquest of new parts of
the globe, notably sub-Saharan Africa, by Europeans yielded valuable natural resources such as
rubber, diamonds and coal and helped fuel trade and investment between the European imperial
powers, their colonies, and the United States.[176]

The first phase of "modern globalization" began to break down at the beginning of the 20th
century, with World War I. The novelist VM Yeates criticised the financial forces of
globalization as a factor in creating World War I.[177]
[edit] Post-World War II
Globalization, since World War II, is partly the result of planning by politicians to break down
borders hampering trade. Their work led to the Bretton Woods conference, an agreement by the
world's leading politicians to lay down the framework for international commerce and finance,
and the founding of several international institutions intended to oversee the processes of
globalization. Globalization was also driven by the global expansion of multinational
corporations based in the United States and Europe, and worldwide exchange of new
developments in science, technology and products, with most significant inventions of this time
having their origins in the Western world according to Encyclopedia Britannica.[178] Worldwide
export of western culture went through the new mass media: film, radio and television and
recorded music. Development and growth of international transport and telecommunication
played a decisive role in modern globalization.
These institutions include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the
World Bank), and the International Monetary Fund. Globalization has been facilitated by
advances in technology which have reduced the costs of trade, and trade negotiation rounds,
originally under the auspices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which led
to a series of agreements to remove restrictions on free trade.
Since World War II, barriers to international trade have been considerably lowered through
international agreements — GATT. Particular initiatives carried out as a result of GATT and the
World Trade Organization (WTO), for which GATT is the foundation, have included:
• Promotion of free trade:
○ elimination of tariffs; creation of free trade zones with small or no tariffs
○ Reduced transportation costs, especially resulting from development of
containerization for ocean shipping.
○ Reduction or elimination of capital controls
○ Reduction, elimination, or harmonization of subsidies for local businesses
○ Creation of subsidies for global corporations
○ Harmonization of intellectual property laws across the majority of states, with
more restrictions
○ Supranational recognition of intellectual property restrictions (e.g. patents granted
by China would be recognized in the United States)
Cultural globalization, driven by communication technology and the worldwide marketing of
Western cultural industries, was understood at first as a process of homogenization, as the global
domination of American culture at the expense of traditional diversity. However, a contrasting
trend soon became evident in the emergence of movements protesting against globalization and
giving new momentum to the defense of local uniqueness, individuality, and identity.[179]
The Uruguay Round (1986 to 1994)[180] led to a treaty to create the WTO to mediate trade
disputes and set up a uniform platform of trading. Other bilateral and multilateral trade
agreements, including sections of Europe's Maastricht Treaty and the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have also been signed in pursuit of the goal of reducing tariffs and
barriers to trade.
World exports rose from 8.5% in 1970, to 16.2% of total gross world product in 2001.[181]
In the 1990s, the growth of low cost communication networks allowed work done using a
computer to be moved to low wage locations for many job types. This included accounting,
software development, and engineering design.
In late 2000s, much of the industrialized world entered into a deep recession.[182] Some analysts
say the world is going through a period of deglobalization after years of increasing economic
integration.[183][184] China has recently[when?] become the world's largest exporter surpassing
Germany.[185]
[edit] Measurement
Economic globalization can be measured in different ways. These center around the four main
economic flows that characterize globalization:
• Goods and services, e.g., exports plus imports as a proportion of national income or per
capita of population
• Labor/people, e.g., net migration rates; inward or outward migration flows, weighted by
population
• Capital, e.g., inward or outward direct investment as a proportion of national income or
per head of population
• Technology, e.g., international research & development flows; proportion of populations
(and rates of change thereof) using particular inventions (especially 'factor-neutral'
technological advances such as the telephone, motorcar, broadband)
As globalization is not only an economic phenomenon, a multivariate approach to measuring
globalization is the recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. The index measures the
three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political. In addition to three
indices measuring these dimensions, an overall index of globalization and sub-indices referring
to actual economic flows, economic restrictions, data on personal contact, data on information
flows, and data on cultural proximity is calculated. Data is available on a yearly basis for 122
countries, as detailed in Dreher, Gaston and Martens (2008).[186] According to the index, the
world's most globalized country is Belgium, followed by Austria, Sweden, the United Kingdom
and the Netherlands. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Haiti,
Myanmar, the Central African Republic and Burundi.[187]
A.T. Kearney and Foreign Policy Magazine jointly publish another Globalization Index.
According to the 2006 index, Singapore, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and
Denmark are the most globalized, while Indonesia, India and Iran are the least globalized among
countries listed.