Globalizing world

635 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
635
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Globalizing world

  1. 1. A globalizing world
  2. 2. It is a small world, and globalization ismaking it smaller…  Since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990’s, a new regime has slowly evolved and, in fact, continues to take shape. Globalization has remade the economy of virtually every nation, reshaped almost every industry and touched billions of lives, often in ambiguous ways;  Globalization has come to mean a complete reordering of international priorities, strategies, and values as all states are drawn ever more tightly in the interdependent global economic, technological, communications cultural and ethical web;  Economic globalization has accelerated the flows of communications, capital, technology, tourism, trade and immigration transforming the spatial organization of social relations and transactions, and generating increased levels of activity across communities around the entire world;  Today, drugs, crime, sex, war, protest movements, terrorism, disease, people, ideas, images, news, information, entertainment, pollution, goods, and money all travel the globe. They are crossing national boundaries and connecting the world on an unprecedented scale and with previously unimagined speed. 2
  3. 3. … globalization has drawn countries closertogether  The figures below represent the conventional projection of the Pacific in terms of distances (first figure) and in terms of time-space (second figure) based on relative time accessibility by scheduled airline flights in 1975:  The figures are quite different with some places in the second picture brought close together while others forced apart or forced out of the map. 3Source: A Globalizing World? Culture, Economics, Politics; Edited by David Held (2004).
  4. 4. … it has stretched connections andrelationships across the world  Increased connectivity has led many companies to spread their suppliers, facilities, operations, and costumer base across a range of regions and countries. The figure below illustrates Volkswagen’s international production system: 4Source: The Geography of the World Economy; Knox, P. and Agnew, J. (1998).
  5. 5. … it has made communications almostinstantaneous  The shrinking of distance and the speed of movement that characterize the current globalization process find one of its most extreme forms in electronically based communities from all around the world interacting in real time and simultaneously;  Communications networks stretching across the world have the potential to connect people, previously disconnected from what went on elsewhere, into a shared social space that is quite distinct from territorial space. Developments in information and communication technologies have changed relations between people and places and the ways we work:   Today, communications networks have connected nearly a billion homes with the capacity to talk to each other within a few seconds;   Every month, the New York Public Library reports 10 million information requests from across the globe on its main website, compared to 50,000 books dispensed to its local users (Darnton, 1999);   Workers in India can connect to corporations and consumers in the U.S. with high speed satellite to perform a series of activities. The staffing of call centers has been highly publicized in the news. 5
  6. 6. Declining Costs of Everyday TransactionsIndustrial Economy Approximate Cost Per Transaction Banking $1.07 eEconomy $.01 Travel Booking $10 $2 $6 Trading $150
  7. 7. … it has created a world market dominatedby transnational corporations  The world market is as old as trade itself, Transnational Corporations have grown but in the last 25 years it has developed in importance so much further and faster than ever before. The that today 51 of the top total foreign assets of the top 100 100 economies are transnational corporations totaled $2,453 corporations, not billion in 2000. In the same year, countries General Motors was worth more than the (Albert, 2001) national economy of New Zealand;  Transnational Corporations are a major Home Base of Top 100 TNCs (Countries’ shares force behind globalization as they reach in terms of size of foreign assets, 2000) beyond their original national borders to find investors, managers, workers, raw materials, as well as costumers;  Their need to open up economies and to minimize controls on trade and the circulation of capital sometimes puts their interests in collision with those of governments both in their own countries and in their many host countries. 7Source: The Penguin State of the World, Dan Smith with Ane Braein (2003).
  8. 8. … it has also displaced some governmentfunctions onto the international arena  As economic globalization extends the economy beyond the boundaries of the nation-state, and hence its sovereignty, transnational firms need to ensure that functions traditionally exercised by the state such as guaranteeing property rights and contracts be maintained;  Globalization has been accompanied by the institution of new transnational legal and regulatory regimes and the creation of s series of organizations to administer those regimes;  Among the most important ones in the private sector today are international commercial arbitration, and the variety of institutions which fulfill rating and advisory functions that have become essential for the operation of the global economy;  The World Trade Organization (WTO), for example, has the authority to override local and national authority in terms of agreement violations, and hence can discipline sovereign states; 8
  9. 9.   At the global level there has been also an explosive growth in the number of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Currently, about 300 IGOs and 26,000 NGOs channel international contacts among governments, groups, and individuals;  The proliferation of organizations has greatly contributed to the complexity of the international system. No longer are most international interactions bilateral but more and more states, even the most powerful ones, engage in multilateral diplomacy within the framework of IGOs such as the WTO, IMF, World Bank, the European Union, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice, among many others;  Citizen groups play an increasing significant role in mobilizing, organizing, and exercising power across national boundaries. This explosion of “citizen diplomacy” constitutes a rudimentary “transnational civil society;”  At the UN Earth Summit in Rio in 1992, for example, the formal representatives of government were outnumbered by the representatives of environmental, corporate and other interested parties. 9
  10. 10. International Organizations (2002) Greenland Finland Sweden Iceland Canada Norway Russia United Kingdom Poland Ireland Czech Rep. Netherlands USA Luxemburg Slovakia Kazakhstan Mongolia Spain Japan Portugal Turkey Italy China South Korea Morocco Israel Iraq Iran Mexico Algeria Libya Saudi Taiwan Cuba Egypt Arabia India Mauritania Kuwait Hong Kong Mali Niger Guatemala Chad Sudan El Salvador Qatar Vietnam Nicaragua Thailand Honduras Ethiopia Thailand Philippines UAE Costa Rica Venezuela Somalia Malaysia Panama Nigeria Colombia Congo Kenya Singapore Tanzania Peru Angola Indonesia Nova Guinea Brazil Madagascar Namibia Australia Chile Mozambique S. AfricaLeague of Arab States – Morocco,Algeria, Mauritania, Libya, Egypt, ArgentinaSudan, Somalia, Saudi Arabia,Yemen, Oman, UAE, Qatar, New ZealandBahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan andPalestine Authority Free Trade Area of the Americas Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)G8 Countries – Canada, France,Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, UK African Union Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC)and U.S. (GDP of $21,136 million or European Union (EU) Other countries and territories 10 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)67% of the world’s GDP)Source: The Penguin State of the World, Dan Smith with Ane Braein (2003).
  11. 11. A World of Protests (Sites of Major Anti-globalization Demonstrations Since 1999) Montreal April 2001 Göteborg June 2000 Prague September 2000 Seattle Davos November 1999 January 2000 Seoul October 2000 Bangkok February 2000 .. . . Washington D.C. April 2000 Bologna Honolulu June 2000 May 2001 Melbourne Porto Alegre Naples September 2000 January 2001 March 2001 G-8 Member Genoa Countries July 2001 11Source: “The Globalization Backlash,” John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, Foreign Policy.
  12. 12. … but globalization has excluded many frominternational economic flows  Globalization create connections and disconnections associated with cross-national flows and networks. Those who are disconnected are effectively excluded from participation in the global economy creating what Castells (1998) calls the “Fourth World” made up of multiple pockets of social exclusion; Europe 18 GreenlandTelephone lines per 100 Finlandpeople, 2001 Iceland Sweden 70 or more Canada Norway Russia Asia 50 - 69 United 3 Kingdom Italy Austria 30 - 49 Ireland Slovenia Netherlands 10 - 29 USA Luxemburg Greece Kazakhstan Mongolia Spain 1-9 Portugal Japan Israel China under 1 Mexico Morocco Iran Taiwan Algeria Libya Egypt Saudi no data Cuba Arabia India Hong Kong Mauritania Mali Niger Guatemala Chad Sudan Thailand Nicaragua El Salvador Personal Honduras Ethiopia Malaysia Costa Ricacomputers per 100 Panama Nigeria Kenya Colombia Congo Singapore Nova Guineapeople, 2001 estimates Tanzania Indonesia Americas Angola More than 75 cell 27 Peru Brazil Madagascar Namibiaphone subscribers per Mozambique Australia100 people Oceania Africa S. Africa 40 Chile 1 Argentina New Zealand 12Source: The Penguin State of the World, Dan Smith with Ane Braein (2003).
  13. 13. … and has concentrated wealth, poverty andinequality worldwide  The global wealth gap keeps growing. The average inhabitant of the world’s richest country is over 100 times wealthier than the average inhabitant of the poorest country;  However, many people in rich countries live in great poverty while some people in poor countries live in great wealth. Twenty years ago, Forbes, in its first ranking of wealth, found 140 billionaires worldwide. Today, the total is 793. The number of millionaires in Asia grew by some 700,000 between 2000 and 2004. In the same period, North America’s population of millionaires shot up 500,000, and Europe’s increased by 100,000. According to Merrill Lynch, China could become the world’s leading source of luxury shoppers by 2009;  While 16% of the world’s people buy 80% of all consumables, 45 million people in the U.S. are living in poverty and 1.3 billion persons, that is 22% of the world’s population, lives below the poverty line - more than a billion people worldwide lives on less than $1 a day and half of the world’s population lives on less than $2 (The Guardian, October 2002);  Even tough there is enough food in the world to feed everybody, 2 billion people – 1/3 of the world’s population - suffer from malnutrition;  The average life expectancy today in the poorest African countries is the same as in Japan in 1900;  Between 2000 and 2020, 68 million people will die of HIV/AIDS, 55 million of them in Sub-Saharan Africa - this is more than the total killed in both world wars;  The poorer countries of the world pay out more in interest on their debts than they receive in economic aid, most of which takes the form of low-interest loans. In 2000, developing countries’ debts amounted to nearly $2,000 billion. 13Source: The Penguin State of the World, Dan Smith with Ane Braein (2003).
  14. 14. … finally, globalization has changed thenature and significance of immigration  Global economic restructuring shape the nature, pace, and processes of migration and the terms of national belonging raising questions as to whether political communities tied to particular pieces of land constituted into nation-states are still as important as they once were to the organization of human affairs or whether they are subject to erosion by the process of globalization;  Immigration is one of the constitutive processes of globalization today, even though not recognized or represented as such in mainstream accounts about globalization;  International migrations are embedded in larger geopolitical and transnational economic dynamics (Sassen 1998). The worldwide evidence shows that there is considerable patterning in the geography of migrations, and that the major receiving countries tend to get immigrants from their zones of influence. Immigration is at least partly an outcome of the actions of governments and major private companies in receiving countries;  What we still narrate in the language of immigration, is actually a series of processes having to do with globalization of economic activity, of cultural activity, of identity formation – a set of processes whereby global elements are localized, international labor markets are constituted, and cultures from all over the world are de- and re-territorialized – they are along with the internationalization of capital a fundamental aspect of globalization;  This new reality creates new notions of community, of membership, and of entitlement. The crucial question here is if a new transnational politics can be centered around the new transnational economic geography that is, can politics be denationalized? 14
  15. 15.   Today, around 3% of the world’s population live outside their country of birth;   The United Nations Population Division estimates an increase from 75 million to 150 million international migrants between 1965 and 2000. The annual rate of increase was more than 2.5% per year over the last 15 years compared to an annual rate of increase in population growth of about 1.5%. Europe •  net migration 0.8 million •  54 million migrants excluding refugees Greenland North America Finland Iceland Sweden •  net migration Canada Norway Russia 1.4 million United Kingdom •  40 million migrants excluding refugees Ireland Czech Rep. Netherlands Slovakia Luxemburg Kazakhstan Mongolia USA Spain South Korea Portugal Turkey Italy Japan Morocco Israel Iraq China Asia Mexico Iran Libya Taiwan Algeria Egypt Saudi Cuba Arabia India Hong Kong •  net migrationCross-border Migration Mauritania 1.3 million Mali Niger Guatemala Sudan Thailand •  41 million migrants (foreign-born population El Salvador Chad Vietnam Nicaragua excluding refugees excluding refugees as a Honduras Ethiopia Malaysia Costa Rica Venezuela percentage of total Panama Nigeria Somalia population, 2000 Colombia Congo Kenya Singapore Tanzania Nova Guinea 50.0% and over Indonesia Angola 20.0% - 49.9% Peru Brazil Namibia Australia Oceania 5.0% - 19.9% 1.0% - 4.9% Latin America & Caribbean •  net migration Africa 0.09 million Under 1.0% •  net migration 0.5 million •  6 million migrants •  net migration excluding refugees •  6 million migrants Argentina New Zealand 0.5 million excluding refugees •  13 million migrants excluding refugees 15Source: The Penguin State of the World, Dan Smith with Ane Braein (2003); International Organization for Migration, 2001.
  16. 16. … and immigration, in turn, has exposed thegrowing contradictions of globalization  The increased circulation of capital, goods, and information under the impact of globalization, deregulation, and privatization has forced the discussion of the circulation of people, exposing the contradictions between immigration and the public policies that are both causes and consequences of international migration;  It is now conventional to think that the free movement of finance and trade from national regulations as one of the sources of the dynamism of a globalized economy, while at the same time insisting on the importance of maintaining nationalized systems for the regulation of migration; The major contradiction that many observers see emerging from this new international context “is that while deregulation has been a crucial mechanism to negotiate the juxtaposition of the global and the national - freeing up markets and reducing sovereignty of the state by denationalizing national territories for the operation of capital - it is the opposite when it comes to the transnationalization of labor. Here there is a renationalization of politics” (Saskia Sassen, Globalization and Its Discontents, 1998) 16 U.S. – Mexican Border, The New York Times
  17. 17. …this migratory flow has created ambivalenceamong hosting country populations  Increase in immigration, coupled with the fact that it has been accompanied by a greater racial-ethnic and cultural diversity, has created ambivalence regarding the implications for socio-cultural identities in receiving countries: … a German government official is reputed to have said, in response to a question about the Germany’s experience with guest workers, that “in the beginning we thought we were getting workers, but in the end we realized we were getting people”  Economic and fiscal implications of immigration create individual ambivalence and social tension since the economic well-being of local populations will either rise, fall, or stay the same on account of immigration – tangible costs and benefits are associated with immigration (Bean and Stevens 2003);  The presence of undocumented immigrants exacerbate anxieties eliciting both the best and the worst features of many hosting societies. The best, recalls national myths of “countries as nations of immigrants” and “land of opportunities” where dreams are realized. The worst, bring nativist responses. 17

×