Anti-globalization arguments - Essay Example

Anti-globalization arguments Introduction Globalization is the integration of different parts of the world from the technological, political and economic perspectives and has emerged as the most crucial and impactful development in the modern world. The advantages and drawbacks of globalization have always remained highly debated topics among different scholars, economists and industry practitioners. There have been many arguments presented over the history of globalization related to the negative impacts of this process on the social, trading, political, economic, environmental and cultural aspects of the world. This report deals with critically analyzing whether the anti globalization arguments have actually undervalued the far reaching positive impacts and benefits that have been derived by different nations through globalization. The analysis part includes a discussion regarding the benefits of globalization for different industries, cultures, societies and nations, a cross section analysis of the different facets of globalization as a phenomenon, the main areas in which globalization is found to have negative impacts and the criticisms made against the same. Also, how the proponents of globalization have responded to these criticisms has been discussed in the analysis. The report also includes a discussion of the ways in which the supporters of globalization have presented their views to negate the anti globalization arguments. The report is concluded by summarizing the findings and presenting a derived view of the topic. Discussion Globalization is a dynamic aspect which includes wide varieties of dimensions like economic dimensions, social dimensions, political dimensions, cultural dimensions, environmental and security dimensions and so on (Goldin and Reinert, 2006). The advent of the globalization era has changed the way corporations across the world function and has also had metamorphic effects on the way the global industries function. The access to international markets and global production capabilities offer the companies with extraordinary scopes of expanding their businesses and ensuring continued growth and profitability. Also, globalization acts as a powerful catalyst in the stimulation of innovations and technological advancements in different sectors (Hoekman and Nicita, 2011). However, there is no doubt regarding the fact that that function on an international platform face complex and inherent challenges associated with the conducting of business in compliant and ethical ways that meet the distinct high standards as set by the constituencies of different countries. The main areas in which globalization is found to have negative impacts and consequences are child labour, poverty, gaps between two extreme classes within a society, women’s rights, labour and wage standards, transition towards democracy, the environment and culture (Bhargava, 2006). The anti globalization arguments presented by the different groups of opponents of globalization suggest that globalization has had derogatory effects on the world economy and society by adding to poverty levels in different economies, especially in the third world economies, increasing the gap between the rich and the poor classes of people, threatening the equality and other kinds of human rights management aspects and accelerating the damages made to the environment through the excessive use of natural resources and exploitation of many underdeveloped regions by the powerful multinational companies. The anti globalization arguments have been presented in various meetings of the European Union, The World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Economic Forum, The International Monetary Fund (IMF), The World Bank and the G-8 summits (Melitz and Trefler, 2012). It is true that globalization is a complex and multilayered phenomenon and has given rise to higher levels of interconnectivity as well as interdependence among all the nations of the world, irrespective of whether they are developed, developing or underdeveloped nations. Many of the issues that have been identified by the anti globalizations activists regarding the impacts of globalization are real. These include both economic and non economic aspects that have crucial roles to pay in modern societies and economies (Hoekman, 2013). Nevertheless, all the anti globalization arguments cannot be exactly proved because many of the problems that have been argued to have been caused by globalization can actually have been caused by other ancillary factors. While some of the issues identified in the present world have stemmed from the global integration processes, others can be identified to have been caused by different factors and changes that have occurred over years (Harrison, 2007). The anti globalization arguments have raised the questions regarding the actual value of globalization. The idea that globalization and hyper-globalization can lead to increased international conflicts and ultimately lead to the collapse of the global trading and policy agreement system act as a source of developing a fear among people regarding this phenomenon (Baldwin and Winters, 2004). The supporters of globalization are of the view that the establishment of global cooperation and collaboration through the development of mutually agreed upon policies and standards and through the establishment of new international institutions can be the strategies to offset the negative impacts of globalization (Hufbauer, Schott, Vieiro and Wada, 2013). The increasing volumes of global trade processes, the cross border trading of products and services and the cross border flow of human resources are the common reflections of the process of globalization. On one hand, globalization is identified as the major means of increasing the volumes of worldwide exchanges and trades and creating an integrated, borderless and open international economy while on the other hand, globalization is also criticized as the main reason for which the multinational companies are relocating to the developing locations which are less tightly regulated and thus, the companies are being able to exploit the natural resources and labour pools available in these regions (Mattoo and Subramanian, 2009). The anti globalization arguments also suggest that the inequality between the rich and the poor segments of the society has been widened by the process of globalization because in these scenarios the powerful corporate entities are often able to exploit the talents and resources available in the less privileged societies and regions of the world (Hummels, Ishii and Yi, 2001). But, it cannot be denied that globalization of the world economy has always been seen as the driver of achieving higher economic interdependence among nations, thereby supporting the economic growth and social well being of the underdeveloped countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Vietnam, Cambodia etc. (Hummels, 2007). Along with the international exchange and flow of products, services, ideas and information as well as the globalization of trade and economies, culture is also severely impacted by globalization and is being exported and imported as a commodity. In this background, often the powerful countries like the United States of America overrun the cultures existing in the smaller and less powerful countries leading to the inherent values and customs of an individual country being fast faded away. This process is commonly termed as Americanization and is recognized to be one of the biggest negative impacts of globalization (The World Bank, 2008). The impact of globalization on the environment and the planet is perhaps the most complex allegation against globalization made by the anti globalization arguments (Held and McGrew, 2007). The fundamental problem of increasing pollution levels, uncontrolled industrial operations and fast destruction of natural resources have significantly increased after the advent of globalization (Lim, Elms and Low, 2012). The establishments of business operations of multinational corporations in different corners of the globe have resulted in more cars, more waste matters, more use of chemicals in production processes and more emission of greenhouse gases all of which add to the environmental degradation through problems like global warming, ozone layer depletion, environmental pollution, carbon footprint and glacial melting (Low, 2012). The free trade practices introduced as a part of globalised economies is seen as the core reason that has started this chain of environmentally harmful processes. One of the key anti globalization arguments that has been placed in recent years is that the phenomenon of globalization acts as a negative influencing factor for the local industries. Since, globalization creates the scope for multinational companies to establish their businesses in foreign countries, the level of competition for the local companies in an industry increases to a high degree. Many times this leads to the death of the local companies who have limited resources and capabilities as compared to the transnational enterprises. The exploitation of cheap labour and natural resources in the underdeveloped or developing countries is another main proposition presented by the anti globalization movements. It has been noticed that the aspects of globalization has actually supported the exploitation of labour resources and natural resources in countries like Nigeria, Cuba, Ghana, Afghanistan etc. It can be argued that the state governments and the international regulatory authorities have still not been able to establish universally accepted mechanisms and code of conducts that would protect the developing countries from being exploited in one way or other by the multinational corporations. The case of free capital flows and the free trade practices without having proper regulatory and monitoring mechanisms often leads to a typical financial capitalism. This may put a nation at a major risk of going through massive outflows of capital funds that may result in the development of downward trends in the economy in the long term. As such, the economic vulnerabilities of the developing nations have increased multiple times in the modern world and the sole reason identified for this is the advent of the globalization era (Brecher, Costello and Smith, 2000). Globalization is said to have intensified the level of interdependence of nations on one another which restraints their abilities to provide an adequate level of welfare for their societies because the regulatory policies for discouraging labour exploitations and resource exploitations are not yet uniformly established across all the developed and developing countries of the world. There are certain sectors in which the policies and regulations are not adequate and necessarily desirable and often act as threats for the poorer countries. In this case, the globalization treaties are often developed to maintain the self interests of different parties instead of the establishment of protective and fair agreements that would protect the interest of all classes of the societies and all the entities involved in the globalised foray (Lieberthal and Wang, 2012). It can be said in this respect that it is not globalization but the lack of suitable policies and internationally established norms which act as the prime drivers of the negative impacts of globally interconnected processes on the world economy. The domestic policies of countries, especially the third world countries have been significantly influencing the negative consequences of the trade and economic practices included in globalization (Friedman, 2007). Conclusion Thus, it can be clearly identified that globalization being a complex process has different meanings and interpretations for different groups of people. While the proponents of globalization see this phenomenon as a positive change in the global perspective, the opponents of globalization argue that this is a dangerous phenomenon that may bring about serious repercussions for the global society in the future years to come. Whatever the anti globalization arguments are, it can be clearly concluded that globalization remains and will continue to remain a highly powerful and impactful aspect of the modern world system. The global interconnection and integration of nations, trade practices and business practices represent one of the most powerful causes for determining the future years of businesses, nations, and societies as well as the planet as a whole unit. References Baldwin, R. E. & Winters, A. 2004. Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bhargava, V. 2006. Global Issues for Global Citizens: An Introduction to Key Development Challenges. Washington: The World Bank. Brecher, J., Costello, T., & Smith, B. 2000. Globalization from below. Cambridge, MA: South End Press. Friedman, T. L. 2007. The World is Flat: a Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. London: Picador. Goldin, I. & Reinert, K. 2006. Globalization for Development. Washington: The World Bank. Harrison, A. 2007. Globalization and Poverty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Held, D. & McGrew, A. 2007. Globalization/Anti-Globalization: Beyond the Great Divide, 2nd ed. London: Polity. Hoekman, B. & Nicita, A. 2011. Trade Policy, Trade Costs, and Developing Country Trade. World Development, Vol. 39 (12), pp 2069–2070. Hoekman, B. 2013. Enabling Trade: Valuing Growth Opportunities. Davos: World Economic Forum report. Hufbauer, G. C., Schott, J., Vieiro, M. & Wada, E. 2013. Local Content Requirements: A Global Problem. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper. Hummels, D. 2007. Transportation Costs and International Trade in the Second Era of Globalization. Journal of Economic Perspectives. Vol. 21 (3), pp.130-132. Hummels, D. L., Ishii, J. & Yi, K. M. 2001. The Nature and Growth of Vertical Specialization in World Trade. Journal of International Economics, Vol. 54 (1), pp. 75–76. Lieberthal, K. & Wang, J. 2012. Addressing US-China Strategic Distrust. Washington: Brookings Institution. Lim, C. L., Elms, D. K. & Low, P. 2012. The Trans-Pacific Partnership. A Quest for a Twenty-First Century Trade Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Low, P. 2012. The Trans-Pacific Partnership in a Multilateral World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mattoo, A. & Subramanian, A. 2009. Currency Undervaluation and Sovereign Wealth Funds: A New Role for the World Trade Organization. World Economy, Vol. 32 (8), pp. 1135–1140. Melitz, M. J. & Trefler, D. 2012. Gains from Trade when Firms Matter. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 26 (2), pp. 91–118. The World Bank. 2008. Globalization, Growth, and Poverty: Building an Inclusive World Economy. Oxford: WB and Oxford University Press. Read More