|
Globalization is perhaps the central concept of our age. Yet, a single definition of globalization does not--exist either among academics[1] or in everyday conversation. There is also a lack of consensus as to whether or not globalization is a useful concept to portray current events.[2] While most conceptions focus on different aspects of growing interdependence be it economic, cultural, technological, and the like, at a basic level globalization refers to growing interconnectedness.
Some certainly do reject the notion that we have entered a fundamentally new era.[3] There are many, however, who see globalization as a genuine restructuring of social organization. Most definitions incorporate a notion of a growing magnitude of global flows such that one can truly speak of A global society. They find evidence that human activity has become interregional or intercontinental in scale.[4] Although the globalization process is a long, historically rooted one, it is not without fits and starts and is not teleological.[5] In short, globalization is a highly complex interaction of forces producing integration and disintegration, cooperation and conflict, order and disorder.[6]
There is much debate and little consensus on whether globalization is a positive development. Recent popular titles on globalization, "Lexus and the Olive Tree" and "Jihad Vs. McWorld," attest to the seemingly contradictory unifying and divisive forces inherent in globalization. For some, globalization processes, on balance, represent a tremendous opportunity for prosperity, peace, and democracy.[7] Others, by contrast, see greater potential for conflict, extreme self-interest, unbridled corporate power, and disregard for people and entire civilizations.[8] The attacks of September 11 are perhaps the most dramatic evidence that people feel great unease about the forces of globalization and modernity.[9] As a microcosm of the complexity of globalization, the motivation of the attackers may have been anti-modern and anti-globalization, the preparation and the attack itself were facilitated by globalizing processes. In reality, globalization has sparked unease and discontentment in a range of groups from all parts of the world.[10]
This essay will provide a brief, and necessarily incomplete, overview of debates surrounding globalization as a source of and an antidote for conflict. The discussion will focus on economics, political authority, cultural impacts, and discontentment. These categorizations are clearly arbitrary, but given the interconnectedness central to globalization, fully disentangling different forces and processes is impossible.
Economic Globalization
For many, globalization is equated with economic interdependence. At the dawn of the 21st century, the scale and magnitude of global economic interaction appears to be unprecedented.[11] The volume of capital flows far exceeds that of the past. The developing world, too, have increasingly become a part of global trade and capital flows.[12] Contemporary patterns of economic globalization suggest the emergence of a new international division of labor.[13] In short, the world has reached a stage in which one can meaningfully refer to one global economy.[14]
Others present a more limited view. Current trends suggest economic and financial integration has proceeded only in a limited manner.[15] Economic flows remain highly concentrated amongst the wealthiest countries.[16] Within North America, Europe, and East Asia, contrary to the thesis that unfettered global capital will induce homogenization in policy, important differences in the structuring of economic life persist.[17] Even multinational corporations, seen by many as the prime agents of globalization, remain tied in significant ways to their country of origin.[18]
Debate has waged as to whether economic globalization will exacerbate economic inequalities and conflict or contribute to advancing the lot of the poorest relative to others. Studies have examined whether globalization processes have reduced or exacerbated wealth inequalities within developed countries and developing ones.[19] While markets will produce winners and losers, liberals argue that the openness accompanying globalization will benefit all.[20] Others see the potential to produce widening disparities.[21] The short answer is that the effect of globalization has been both positive and negative and is dependent on a range of domestic and international factors. Extensive evidence also exists to support the claim that economic interdependence is related to more peaceful relations. States, for example, that trade more with each other are less likely to go to war.[22] The direction of causation is less clear, however. In other words, does greater trade lead to peace or does peace lead to greater trade? The greater ties from interdependence have been argued to lead to both greater cooperation and conflict. The relationship is, in fact, most likely nonlinear.[23]
Nation-states bypassed by globalization may resent the advancement of others. At the same time, many critics argue engagement in the global economy is exploitation in itself. For those who believe the nation-state is in retreat, the growing power of unaccountable market forces and international organizations provokes calls for change.[24] Many NGOs (and global civil society more broadly) resist at least some aspects of globalization. Many social movements and NGOs seek to give ideas of human rights, environmental protection and the like equal footing with economic efficiency. One might divide them into those who seek a fundamental restructuring of the global system and those who want to reform the existing system. Reformers seek a more equitable distribution of wealth, attention to the plight to women, and addressing the global environmental crisis.[25] More radical solutions would severely curtail market forces to prevent the unwanted effects of the global free market. However, the free-marketers, who see the benefits of greater interconnectedness, particularly economic openness, say anti-globalization protestors have misplaced their anger.[26] Acording to globalization advocates, the problems identified by the anti-globalization movement arise from relying too little on markets and individualism, not too much.
The Nature of Political Authority
One important discussion surrounds whether the nation-state is obsolete as the best form of political organization. Economic and social processes increasingly cross borders making it increasingly difficult for states to control their territory, a central component of sovereignty. With respect to many contemporary issues, the nation-state no longer appears to be the most suitable level of decision making. As governance structures are established at the global level to deal with the growing number of global problems, conflicts have also emerged as to how to make international organizations more accountable and democratic.
Future of the Nation-State
Regardless of how historically fleeting[27] or fictitious in much of the world[28], the model of the Westphalian nation-state is increasingly called into question. In economic affairs, with states reluctant to cede authority to international actors, some see economic processes out of control [29], leaving little option but to accommodate the forces of globalization.[30] Mobile capital puts pressure on states to pursue neo-liberal policies[31] and government spending is constrained to be more competitive.[32] Transportation and communication advances make it easier for diaspora groups or others to organize and challenge state authority. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or the technology and expertise to construct them are a growing concern. Where states have collapsed and human rights violations rampant, the "CNN effect" has resulted in public pressure on other governments to intervene via peacekeeping operations. To deal with such developments, states have found it useful to construct international organizations and grant them significant decision-making authority. These organizations can at times provide a venue in which disputes can be peacefully adjudicated. What is more, a host of nonstate actors, whether al-Qaeda or Amnesty International or Microsoft, appear to have significant ability to shape state behavior.
Global Governance
For many, it is increasingly clear that real authority has been transferred to international organizations and other non-state actors. As such, this raises questions about how they may be made more democratically accountable. Intergovernmental organizations are increasingly important sites in which economic globalization is contested.[33] Civil society groups have had a growing, yet uneven, effect on nation-states and international organizations.[34] Non-governmental organizations make the claim that they should have a greater voice to put a check on national self-interest, dominance of the global North, and corporate greed they perceive to dominate the decision-making of most international organizations. [35] Many have pointed out, however, that civil society itself does not have strong claims to democratic authority.[36] Speaking of a global civil society also masks significant differences between groups, such as whether they come from the global North or South.
Technology and Governance
Given the close relationship between globalization and technological innovation, research has also examined how new technologies will effect our notions of democracy and citizenship. On the surface, it may seem that these technologies would allow for greater information availability allowing the oppressed to rise up against authoritarian governments as well as allowing the disadvantaged to participate on a more equal footing in advanced industrial democracies. Recent scholarship, however, has taken issue with the assumption that these technologies are liberating. Some have pointed out that technologies make surveillance and control easier.[37] What is more, even within the global North, access to digital technology remains highly uneven, and is becoming more so.[38] In addition, the use of technology may run the risk of destroying social capital, which many see as a vital component of a vibrant democracy.[39] Some argue that democracy requires shared experiences and, as the Internet allows us to become increasingly atomized, this will be lost. In fact, the Internet, and the proliferation of media in general, stifles debate by making it easy to customize the information we receive to our tastes, thereby making it easier to avoid views in opposition to our own.[40]
Cultural Globalization
Through the global media and communications technologies, virtually everyone on earth is exposed to foreign ideas and practices. Some argue that the scale of global communication and migration has begun to break down national identities.[41] The emergence of NGOs and global social movements as important political actors provide further evidence for a new culture of global civil society.[42]
For many, cultural globalization means Westernization or Americanization. An important distinction concerning today's cultural globalization is that it is largely driven by corporations, rather than countries. As such, one of the central concerns is the spread of consumer culture.[43] For many critics, non-Western culture and practices are at risk of being overwhelmed by homogenizing "McDonaldization".
Skeptics contend that the erosion of culture has been overstated. They point to evidence that local culture remains strong.[44] Cultural interactions have taken place for centuries so to argue non-Western cultures are somehow pristine is naive. In a normative sense, the cultural degradation argument dismisses the ability of non-Western people to control their destiny and incorporate those attributes they may find useful. What is more, some argue that national identities are founded on real differences that have continued salience.[45]
Other skeptics point to the growth of ethnic and nationalist movements in the post-Cold War world as evidence that these sources of identity remain strong. Intense interaction may make people more cognizant of difference and lead to conflict.[46] Information technology may, in fact, intensify traditional identities.[47] Cultural globalization involves processes of unequal power, which brings traditions and identities into question. Where ethnic and religious groups feel threatened by globalization, there is the potential for conflict.[48]
This discontent has gained renewed attention as some see globalization and modernity as a motivation for September 11.[49] Since then, there has been increasing attention to Islamic fundamentalism. For some, the conflict is a long historical one between Muslim and Christian civilizations.[50] As such, cultural differences are deemed to be highly resistant to change and increased interaction will produce conflict. Others see a more complex phenomenon. In the last twenty-five years, fundamentalist movements have emerged within virtually all of the world's major religions indicating a broader unease with the forces of globalization and modernity.[51]
Migration is a significant aspect of globalization that has not only economic but also social and cultural effects. While migration is not unique to the present age, communication and transportation technologies allow migrants a greater opportunity to maintain links with their homelands. More porous borders raise questions about notions of citizenship and identity. While challenges to national identity may come from supranational entities such as the European Union, globalization at the same time may facilitate the triggering of more local, particularistic identities.
There is some disagreement on where this is all going and whether globalization could come to an end. Clearly the openness and interconnectedness that emerged in the late 1800s was not permanent. The 1930s saw the major powers carving out spheres of influence and blocking out others. From a broader historical perspective, however, that may have been a hiccup. Whereas before the end of the American Civil War it took months to go by ship from one coast of the US to the other, the transcontinental railroad cut the trip to a week by 1870 and today it is a matter of a few hours by plane. There was some discussion after 9/11 whether the need for security would bring an end to the era of globalization. In some areas, such as educational exchanges, there has been an impact. Overall, however, the flow of goods, people, and messages of peace and war continue unabated some four years later. In many respects, therefore, globalization is not going away. The challenge for humanity, then, is to direct these forces in peaceful and beneficial ways.
[1] For a range of characterizations, see Giddens, A. 2000. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York.; Rosenau, J.N. 1990. Turbulence in World Politics. Brighton: Harvester Wheatsheaf.; Robertson, R. 1992. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.; Scholte, J.A. 2005. Globalization: A Critical Introduction. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.; Z?rn, M. 1995. The Challenge of Globalization and Individualization. In H.H. Holm and G. Sorensen. eds. Whose World Order? Boulder: Westview Press.; Albrow, M. 1996. The Global Age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.; Kofman, E. and Youngs, G. eds. 1996. Globalization: Theory and Practice. London: Pinter.; Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., and Perraton, J. 1999. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
[2] See, for example Held, D. and McGrew, A. 2000. The Great Globalization Debate. In D. Held and A. McGrew. The Global Transformations Reader: An Introduction to the Globalization Debate. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Mittelman, J.H. 2002. Globalization as an Ascendant Paradigm? International Studies Perspectives. 3(1) (February).
[3] On economic interconnectedness in historical perspective, see Jones, R.J.B. 1995. Globalization and Interdependence in the International Political Economy. London: Frances Pinter.; Hirst, P. 1997. The Global Economy: Myths and Realities. International Affairs. 73(3) (July).
[4] Geyer, M. and Bright, C. 1995. World History in a Global Age. American Historical Review. 100(4).; Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
[5] Fernandez-Armesto, F. 1995. Millennium. London: Bantam.; Geyer, M. and Bright, C. 1995. World History in a Global Age. American Historical Review. 100(4).; Zeiler, T. W. 2001. Just Do It! Globalization for Diplomatic Historians. Diplomatic History 25(4): 529-551.
[6] Harvey, D. 1989. The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell.; Robertson, R. 1992. Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.; Barber, B. 1995. Jihad vs. MacWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism are Reshaping the World. New York.
[7] Fukuyama, F. 1989. The End of History? The National Interest. 16(Summer).; Friedman, T. 1999. The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York, Anchor.; Giddens, A. 2000. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York.
[8] Huntington, S. P. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order. New York: Touchstone.; Kaplan, R.D. 2001. The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War. New York: Vintage Books.; Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington DC: Institute for International Economics.; Gray, J. 1998. False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. New York: The New Press.; Herod, A., Tuathail, G.O. and Roberts, S.M. eds. 1998. Unruly World? Globalization, Governance and Geography. London: Routledge.; Hurrell, A and Woods, N. eds. 1999. Inequality, Globalization, and World Politics. Oxford University Press.; Mittelman, J. H. 2000. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformations and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[9] Social Science Research Council. 2001. Essays in Response to September 11.http://www.ssrc.org/sept11/essays/; Friedman, T. and Kaplan, R. 2002. States of Discord: A Globalization Debate. Foreign Policy. March/April. pp. 64-70.; Held, D. and Hirst, P. 2002. Globalisation After 11 September: The Argument of Our Time. Anpen Democracy Dialogue. http://www.opendemocracy.net/document_store/Doc1009-5.pdf.
[10] Kothari, R. 1997. Globalization: A World Adrift. Alternatives. 22: 227-267.; Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington DC: Institute for International Economics.; Sassen, S. 1998. Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: The New Press.; Mittelman, J. H. 2000. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformations and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[11] O'Brien, R. 1992. The End of Geography: Global Financial Integration. London: Pinter.; Altvater, E. and Mahnkopf, B. 1997. The World Market Unbound. Review of International Political Economy. 4(3).; Greider, W. 1997. One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster.; Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington DC: Institute for International Economics.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
[12] Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
[13] Amin, S. 1997. Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. London: Zed Press.; Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.; Hoogvelt, A. 1997. Globalization and the Postcolonial World: The New Political Economy of Development. London: Macmillan.; Johnston, R.J., Taylor, P.J. and Watts, M.J. eds. 1995. Geographies of Global Change. Oxford: Blackwell.; Mittelman, J. H. 2000. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformations and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.; Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington DC: Institute for International Economics.
[14] Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.; Dickson, A. 1997. Development and International Relations. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Frank, A.G. 1998. Re-Orient: Global Economy in the Asian Age. New York: University of California Press.; Geyer, M. and Bright, C. 1995. World History in a Global Age. American Historical Review. 100(4).
[15] Jones, R.J.B. 1995. Globalization and Interdependence in the International Political Economy. London: Frances Pinter.; Garrett, G. 1998. Global Markets and National Politics: Collision Course or Virtuous Circle? International Organization. 52(4): 787-824.
[16] Jones, R.J.B. 1995. Globalization and Interdependence in the International Political Economy. London: Frances Pinter.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
[17] Callinicos, A. et al. 1994. Marxism and the New Imperialism. London: Blackwell.; Ruidrok, W. and Tulder, R.V. 1995. The Logic of International Restructuring. London: Routledge.; Boyer, R. and Drache, D. eds. 1996. States against Markets: The Limits of Globalization. London: Routledge.; Hirst, P. and Thompson, G. 1999. Globalization in Question, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Chan, S. and Scarritt, J.R. 2002. Globalization, Soft Hegemony, and Democratization: Their Sources and Effects. In S. Chan and J.R. Scarritt. eds. Coping with Globalization. London: Frank Cass.
[18] Ruidrok, W. and Tulder, R.V. 1995. The Logic of International Restructuring. London: Routledge.; Doremus, P.N. et. al. 1998 The Myth of the Global Corporation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[19] Krugman, P. and Venables, A. 1995. Globalization and the Inequality of Nations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 110(4).; Rodrik, D. 1997. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington DC: Institute for International Economics.; Burtless, R., Lawrence, R. Litan, R and Shapiro, R. 1998. Globaphobia. Washington DC: Brookings.; Dicken, P. 1998. Global Shift 3rd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.; Mahler, V., Jesuit, D.K. and Roscoe, D.D. 1999. Exploring the Impact of Trade and Investment on Income Inequality. Comparative Political Studies. 32(3).
[20] Ohmae, K. 1990. The Borderless World. London: Collins.; Ohmae, K. 1995. The End of the Nation State. New York: Free Press.; Dollar, D., and Kraay, A. n.d. Growth Is Good for the Poor. Manuscript. World Bank. http://www.worldbank.org/research/growth/absddolakray.htm.
[21] Beetham, D. 1995. What Future for Economic and Social Rights? Political Studies. 48 (special issue).; Commission on Global Governance. 1995. Our Global Neighborhood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.; Bradshaw, Y. W. and Wallace, M. 1996. Global Inequalities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.; Hoogvelt, A. 1997. Globalization and the Postcolonial World: The New Political Economy of Development. London: Macmillan.; UNDP. 1999. Globalization With a Human Face: Human Development Report 1999. New York: Oxford University Press.
[22] Gowa, J., and E. D. Mansfield. 1993. Power-Politics and International-Trade. American Political Science Review 87 (2):408-420.; Mansfield, E. D., and J. C. Pevehouse. 2000. Trade blocs, trade flows, and international conflict. International Organization 54 (4):775-808.; Oneal, J. R., and B. M. Russett. 1997. The classical liberals were right: Democracy, interdependence, and conflict, 1950-1985. International Studies Quarterly 41 (2):267-293.
[23] Barbieri, K. 1996. Economic interdependence: A path to peace or a source of interstate conflict? Journal of Peace Research 33 (1):29-49.
[24] Korten, D. 1996. When Corporations Rule the World. Bloomfield CT: Kumarian Press.; Khor, M. 1999. Rethinking Globalization: Critical Issues and Policy Choices. New York: Zed Books.
[25] Mittelman, J. H. 2000. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformations and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[26] Bhagwati, J. 2002. Coping with Antiglobalization. Foreign Affairs. 81(1) (January/February): 2-7.; Graham, E. M. 2000. Fighting the Wrong Enemy: Antiglobal Activists and MultinationalEnterprises. Washington: Institute for International Economics.
[27] Poggi, G. 1978. The Development of the Modern State: A Sociological Introduction. Stanford: Stanford University Press.; Held, D. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order: From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[28] Krasner, S. 1995. Compromising Westphalia. International Security. 20(3): 472-96.
[29] Giddens, A. 2000. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York.; Z?rn, M. 1995. The Challenge of Globalization and Individualization. In H.H. Holm and G. Sorensen. eds. Whose World Order? Boulder: Westview Press.
[30] Amin, S. 1996. The Challenge of Globalization. Review of International Political Economy. 2.
[31] Gill, S. 1995. Globalization, Market Civilization and Disciplinary Neoliberalism. Millennium. 24(3).; Strange, S. 1996. The Retreat of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.; Amin, S. 1997. Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. London: Zed Press.; Luttwak, E. 1999. Turbo-Capitalism. New York: Basic Books.
[32] Frieden, J. 1991. Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies in a World of Global Finance. International Organization. 45(4).; Garrett, G. and Lange, P. 1991. Political Responses to Interdependence: What's "Left" for the Left? International Organization. 45(4).; Scholte, J.A. 1997. Global Capitalism and the State. International Affairs. 73(3): 427-452.; Gray, J. 1998. False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. New York: The New Press.
[33] Rosenau, J.N. 1990. Turbulence in World Politics. Brighton: Harvester Wheatsheaf.; Shaw, M. 1994. Global Society and International Relations. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Cortell, A.P. and Davies, J.W. 1996. How Do International Institutions Matter? The Domestic Impact of International Rules and Norms. International Studies Quarterly. 40.; Milner, H.V. 1997. Interests, Institutions and Information: Domestic Politics and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.; Herod, A., Tuathail, G.O. and Roberts, S.M. eds. 1998. Unruly World? Globalization, Governance and Geography. London: Routledge.
[34] Meyer, J.W., Boli, J., Thomas, G.M., and Ramirez, F.O. 1997. World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology. 103(1): 144-81.; O'Brien, R., Goetz, A.M., Scholte, J.A., and Williams, M. 2000. Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Institutions and Global Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[35] Ekins, P. 1992. A New World Order: Grassroots Movements for Global Change. London: Routledge.; Burbach, R., N?Zez, O. and Kagarlitsky, B. 1997. Globalization and Its Discontents. London: Pluto Press.
[36] Bohman, J. 1999. International Regimes and Democratic Governance: Political Equality and Influence in Global Institutions. International Affairs. 75(3):499-513.; G?rg, C., and Hirsch, J. 1998. Is International Democracy Possible? Review of International Political Economy. 5(4): 585-615.
[37] Barney, D. 2000. Prometheus Wired: The Hope for Democracy in the Age of Network Technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[38] Wilhelm, A. G. 2000. Democracy in the Digital Age: Challenges to Political Life in Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.
[39] Putnam, R. 1994. Making Democracy Work. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[40] Sunstein, C. 2001. Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press.; Wilhelm, A. G. 2000. Democracy in the Digital Age: Challenges to Political Life in Cyberspace. New York: Routledge.
[41] Rheingold, H. 1995. The Virtual Community. London: Mandarin.
[42] Ekins, P. 1992. A New World Order: Grassroots Movements for Global Change. London: Routledge.; Falk, R. 1995. On Humane Governance: Toward a new Global Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Kaldor, M. 1998. New and Old Wars. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Boli, J. and Thomas, G.M. eds. 1999. Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations Since 1875. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[43] Klein, N. 1999. No Logo: Money, Marketing, and the Growing Anti-Corporate Movement. New York: Picador USA.
[44] Appadurai, A. 1990. Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy. Theory, Culture & Society. 7: 295-310.; Liebes, T. and Katz, E. 1993. The Export of Meaning: Cross-Cultural Readings of Dallas. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Thompson, J.B. 1995. The Media and Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
[45] Smith, A.D. 1990. Towards a Global Culture? In M. Featherstone. ed. Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization, and Modernity. London: Sage.; Hall, S. 1992. The Question of Cultural Identity. In S. Hall, D. Held, and A. McGrew. eds. Modernity and its Futures. Cambridge: Polity Press.
[46] Robins, K. 1991. Tradition and Translation. In J. Corner and S. Harvey. eds. Enterprise and Heritage: Crosscurrents of National Politics. London: Routledge.; Massey, D. and Jess, P. eds. 1995. A Place in the World? Culture, Places and Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[47] Smith, A.D. 1990. Towards a Global Culture? In M. Featherstone. ed. Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization, and Modernity. London: Sage.
[48] Thompson, J.B. 1995. The Media and Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.; Robins, K. 1997. What in the World's Going On? In P. du Gay. ed. Production of Culture/Cultures of Production. London: Sage.;[xlviii] Kepel, G. 1994. The Revenge of God : the Resurgence of Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the modern world. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.; Mittelman, J.H. ed. 1996. Globalization: Critical Reflections. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.; Castells, M. 1997. The Power of Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.; Tibi, B. 1998. The Challenge of Fundamentalism: Political Islam and the New World Disorder. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[49] Fukuyama, F. 2001. Their Target: The Modern World. Newsweek. 138(25) (Dec 17): 42-48.; Lewis, B. 2002. What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response. New York: Oxford University Press.
[50] Huntington, S. P. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order. New York: Touchstone.; Lewis, B. 2001. The Revolt of Islam. The New Yorker. November 19: 50-62.; Lewis, B. 2002. What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response. New York: Oxford University Press.
[51] Kepel, G. 1994. The Revenge of God : the Resurgence of Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the modern world. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.; Naipaul, V. S. 1998. Beyond Belief: Islamic Excursions Among the Converted Peoples. New York: Vintage Book.; Said, E. W. 2001. The Clash of Ignorance. The Nation. October 22.; Willis, E. 2001. Bringing the Holy War Home. The Nation. December 17.
Use the following to cite this article:
Brahm, Eric. "Globalization." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2005 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/globalization/>.
Sources of Additional, In-depth Information on this Topic
Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:
Online (Web) Sources
Globalization 2.0 - Part 1. 2003.
Available at: http://www.aworldofpossibilities.com/details.cfm?id=125.
An interview with John Cavanagh, David Korten, and Vandana Shiva. Globalization is a boon to those who can afford its benefits. Are there hidden costs, though? Explore with us Globalization 2.0, a new version of the global economy that is neither exploitive nor destructive and find the means to democratize the globalization process.
Globalization 2.0 - Part 2. 2003.
Available at: http://www.aworldofpossibilities.com/details.cfm?id=131.
An interview with Arjun Makhijani, Vandana Shiva, and Victoria Tauli-Corpuz. Demand for an equitable global economic system is moving us away from economic apartheid, toward economic democracy. Globalization 1.0 is slowing, serving ever fewer and disserving so many. Can we devise a system, Globalization 2.0, that will equitably serve us all?
Khor, Martin. Globalization and the South: Some Critical Issues. Third World Network.
Available at: http://ideas.repec.org/p/unc/dispap/147.html.
While there are many aspects to globalization, among the most important is the recent globalization of national policy-making not only through the normal spread of orthodox theories but more importantly through international agencies, such as the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organization, through which the North has leverage over the South. The paper examines the liberalization of trade, finance and investment as well as policy implications and choices in each of these categories. It is argued that, while there are some advantages to an open regime for developing countries, the impact of openness depends on a country's level of development and preparedness to take on the challenges of subjecting local production units to foreign competition, of being able to break into world markets, and of weathering the volatility and fickleness of private capital flows and their propensity for lending recipient countries into a debt trap. It is therefore imperative that developing countries be given the possibility to have an adequate range of options, of when, how and to what extent to open their economies. For them to maintain the choice of flexibility in policy options, developing countries have to collectively press their case in international forums and institutions where decisions on the global economy are made. Failure in doing so would mean that developing countries will continue to be subjected to international and national policies that are unsuitable to their development, and that more than ever close off their development prospects and options.
"Globalization: Threat or Opportunity?." , April 12, 2000
Available at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2000/041200.htm.
This piece offers a look at globalization from a pro-world-trade organization. It includes several chapters on various aspects of globalization and questions of poverty.
Offline (Print) Sources
Massey, Doreen and Pat Jess, eds. A Place in the World? Culture, Places and Globalization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1995.
"This volume examines the challenges posed by globalization to the meanings we currently give to place and to culture, and questions the nature of the relationship between them. Issues of identity--cultural, personal, and of place--and the meaning of places and cultures are set in the context of the changing geography of social power. Beginning with international migration, the book establishes a centuries-old context of movement, settlement, and hybridity within which current debates must be set. It raises issues of the rights of movement of both capital and of people, and of the power struggle over the definitions of place and culture. It examines the importance and nature of the identities we confer upon place, and the significance of space and place in the constitution of 'insiders' and 'outsiders'." - Amazon.com
Krasner, Stephen D. "Compromising Westphalia." International Security 20:3, 1996.
The Westphalian model views the internaitonal system as composed of sovereign states having exclusive authority within specified geographic boundaries. The model is used as a benchmark for affirmation of fading sovereignty in the modern world. However, analysis shows that the model does not accurately describe entities whic hare regarded as states and is misleading in its assumption that states are independent rational entities.
O'Brien, Robert, Anne Marie Goetz and Jan Aart Scholte. Contesting Global Governance: Multilateral Institutions and Global Social Movements. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
The contest to shape global governance is increasingly being conducted on a number of levels and among a diverse set of actors. This book argues that increasing engagement between international institutions and sectors of civil society is producing a new form of international organization. The authors study the relationship between the IMF, World Bank, and World Trade Organisation, and environmental, labor, and women's movements, providing a rich analysis of the institutional response to social movement pressure.
Bhagwati, Jagdish N. "Coping with Antiglobalization: A Trilogy of Discontent." Foreign Affairs 81:1, 2002.
In the debate regarding the pros and cons of globalization, the author asserts there lies three main discontents. First with capitalism, second with the "process of globalization," and third with the actions of corporations. He then goes on to develop arguments that refute the three discontents, stating that these three ideas are often follow flawed logic or incorrect assumptions about globalization.
Gray, John. False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism. New York: The New Press, 1998.
Drawing a clear distinction between globalization, which is the increasing interconnectedness of economics, and global capitalism, Gray argues that unfettered global capitalism could be extremely detrimental to "liberal civilization." Though Gray played a major role in revitalizing free market economics when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister of Britain, he here argues that markets are not self-regulating and that a completely free market will lead to economic instability.
Graham, E. M. "Fighting the Wrong Enemy: Antiglobal Activists and Multinational Enterprises." , 2000.
Dicken, Peter. Global Shift. New York: Guilford Press, 1998.
Dicken discusses the economic, political, and technological processes that are creating global shifts in economic activity and affecting local communities in highly uneven ways. The book focuses on the interrelated actions of transnational corporations and states within a volatile technological environment. It features detailed case studies of key global industries, namely textiles, automobiles, electronics, and services.
Held, David, Anthony G. McGrew and David Goldblatt. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999.
This book throws new light on the complex processes that are reshaping the contemporary world. All too often debates about globalization - and about whether it implies the end of the nation-state - have descended into polemics and confusion. Global Transformations overcomes these difficulties. Based on many years of original research, it maps the shape and scope of globalization and provides a comprehensive introduction to the subject, presenting its material in a clear and accessible way. This is the most systematic account available of the process of globalization. It will be illuminating not only to academics and students, but also to policy-makers, managers, and all those interested in the profound transformations affecting societies today.-Amazon
Sassen, Saskia. Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: The New Press, 1998.
A collection of Sassen's essays dealing with topics such as the "global city," gender and migration (reconceived as the globalization of labor), information technology, and the new dynamics of inequality. Sassen brings together cultural and literary studies, feminist theory, political economics, sociology, and political science, showing how vast the chasm between metropolitan business centers and low-income inner cities has become. Throughout, she examines common political, cultural, and economic misconceptions of globalization and offers a thoughtful, provocative new look at our increasingly global society.
Mittleman, James H. "Globalization: An Ascendant Paradigm?." International Studies 3:1, February 2002.
This article explores whether globalization can be viewed as an ascendant paradigm of international studies.
Burtless, Gary, Robert Lawrence and Robert Litan. Globaphobia: Confronting Fears About Open Trade. Washington DC: Brookings, 1998.
For much of the post-World War II period, the increasing globalization of the U.S. economy was welcomed by policymakers and by the American people. We gained the benefits of cheaper and, in some cases, better foreign-made products, while U.S. firms gained wider access to foreign markets. The increasing economic interlinkages with the rest of the world helped promote capitalism and democracy around the globe. Indeed, we helped "win" the Cold War by trading and investing with the rest of the world, in the process demonstrating to all concerned the virtues of trade and markets. In recent years, however, a growing chorus of complaints has been lodged against globalization--which is blamed for costing American workers their jobs and lowering their wages. The authors of this book speak directly and simply to these concerns, demonstrating with easy prose and illustrations why the "globaphobes" are wrong. Globalization has not cost the United States jobs. Nor has it played any more than a small part in the disappointing trends in wages of many American workers. The challenge for all Americans is to embrace globalization and all of the benefits it brings, while adopting targeted policies to ease the very real pain of those few Americans whom globalization may harm. Globaphobia outlines a novel, yet sensible program for advancing this objective.
Rodrik, Dani. Has Globalization Gone Too Far?. Washington DC: Institute for International Economics, 1997.
Globalization is exposing social fissures between those with the education, skills, and mobility to flourish in an unfettered world market-the apparent "winners"-and those without. These apparent "losers" are increasingly anxious about their standards of living and their precarious place in an integrated world economy. The result is severe tension between the market and broad sectors of society, with governments caught in the middle. Compounding the very real problems that need to be addressed by all involved, the kneejerk rhetoric of both sides threatens to crowd out rational debate. From the United States to Europe to Asia, positions are hardening. Author Dani Rodrik brings a clear and reasoned voice to these questions. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? takes an unblinking and objective look at the benefits-and risks-of international economic integration, and criticizes mainstream economists for downplaying its dangers. It also makes a unique and persuasive case that the "winners" have as much at stake from the possible consequences of social instability as the "losers." As Rodrik points out, ". . . social disintegration is not a spectator sport-those on the sidelines also get splashed with mud from the field. Ultimately, the deepening of social fissures can harm all." --Amazon.com
Barber, Benjamin. Jihad vs. McWorld: How Globalism and Tribalism are Reshaping the World. New York: Ballantine Books, 1995.
The central contention is that there are two great opposing forces at work in the world today, border-crossing capitalism and splintering factionalism that are the two biggest threats to democracy. Although capitalism could have only grown to current levels in the soil of democracies, Barber argues that global capitalism now tends to work against the very concept of citizenship, of people thinking for themselves and with their neighbors. Too often now, how we think is the product of a transnational corporation (increasingly, a media corporation) with headquarters elsewhere. And although self-determination is one of the most fundamental of democratic principles, unchecked it has led to tribalism in which virtually no one besides the local power elite gets a fair shake. The antidote, Barber concludes, is to work everywhere to resuscitate the non-governmental, non-business spaces in life, which he calls them "civic spaces" where true citizenship thrives.
Khor, Martin. Rethinking Globalization: Critical Issues and Policy Choices. New York: Zed Books, 1999.
Martin Khor's practical proposals offer action agendas to Third World governments as they are faced with globalization. Khor explains the economic globalization process, showing how it is failing to either increase economic growth or decrease poverty. A critique of Western governments for their domination of the international policy process ensues, where Khor exposes the flaws in the "one size fits all" policy prescriptions of the World Bank, IMF, and WTO. Arguing that Third World countries need room to maneuver, this book proposes innovative and realistic policies.
Giddens, Anthony. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York: Brunner-Routledge, 2000.
Drawn from a series of lectures delivered in 1999, the book discusses how the world is undergoing a major period of historical transition. For Giddens, globalization is reordering societies all over the planet, and although the results are sometimes unpredictable, they are heading in a generally positive direction. In his view, the battleground of the twenty-first century will pit fundamentalism against cosmopolitan tolerance. In a globalizing world, where information and images are routinely transmitted across the globe, we are all regularly in contact with others who think differently, and live differently, from ourselves. Cosmopolitans welcome and embrace this cultural complexity. Fundamentalists find it disturbing and dangerous. Whether in the areas of religion, ethnic identity, or nationalism, they take refuge in a renewed and purified tradition. He is severely critical of what he calls the "traditional family," which he considers an aspect of fundamentalism the world over and an enemy of sexual equality.
Amin, S. "The Challenge of Globalization." Review of International Political Economy 2, 1996.
Doremus, Paul, William W. Keller and Louis W. Pauly. The Myth of the Global Corporation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Critics and defenders of multinational corporations often agree on at least one thing: that the activities of multinationals are creating an overwhelmingly powerful global market that is quickly rendering national borders obsolete. The authors of this book, however, argue that such expectations commonly rest on a myth. They examine key activities of multinational corporations in the United States, Japan, and Europe and explore the relationship between corporate behavior and national institutions and cultures. They demonstrate that the world's leading multinationals continue to be shaped decisively by the policies and values of their home countries and that their core operations are not converging to create a seamless global market. With a wealth of fresh evidence, the authors show that Japanese and German multinationals, in particular, remain only weakly committed to laissez-faire policy orientations and continue to exhibit strong allegiance to national goals in such areas as investment and employment. They also bring to light the consequences of enduring differences in government policies on, for example, industrial cartels, capital markets, and research and development. The authors agree that the world economy is becoming more complex and integrated as overt barriers to trade and investment fall away. But they conclude that the extent of this integration is decisively limited by structural divergence at the level of the firm. The book will be essential reading for those seeking to understand the growing interdependence of still-distinctive industrial societies and the wellsprings of the true global economy.
Strange, Susan. The Retreat of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Who is really in charge of the world economy? Not only governments, argues Susan Strange in The Retreat of the State. Big businesses, drug barons, insurers, accountants and international bureaucrats all encroach on the so-called sovereignty of the state. Professor Strange examines the implications of this rivalry and points to some new directions for research in international relations, international business and economics.
Castells, Manuel. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996.
Castells argues that globalization represents a profound change in the capitalist order, namely the emergence of a "new global informational capitalism." Castells puts forth a systemic analysis of the global informational capitalism that has emerged in the last half of the 20th century. While many books have considered the development of increasingly sophisticated information technology, the shifting conditions of employment and responsibility within corporations, or the rise of corporations whose domains are spread out over several nation-states, Castells unites these topics in a comprehensive thesis, negotiating the tightrope between academic sociology and mainstream business analysis.
Luttwak, Edward. Turbo-Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global Economy. New York: Basic Books, 1999.
In this book Luttwak argues that free market capitalism has gotten out of control. He predicts increases in crime, poverty and unemployment, especially in underdeveloped countries. However negatively he views capitalism, he also sees that moving towards more government regulation could also cause major economic problems.
Korten, David. When Corporations Rule the World. Bloomfield CT: Kumarian Press, 1996.
Korten explains how economic globalization has concentrated the power to govern in global corporations and financial markets and detached them from accountability to the human interest. It documents the devastating human and environmental consequences of the successful efforts of these corporations to reconstruct values and institutions everywhere on the planet to serve their own narrow ends. It also reveals why and how millions of people are acting to reclaim their political and economic power from these elitist forces and presents a policy agenda for restoring democracy and rooting economic power in people and communities.
Hirst, Paul Q. and Grahame Thompson. Globalization in Question. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999.
The authors question the very utility of the concept of globalization by exploring how present forms of global integration are weaker and less intense than those of the belle epoque (1890-1914). In doing so, they present a different picture of the possibilities for its continued and extended governance.
Mittelman, James H., ed. Globalization: Critical Reflections. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1996.
Looks at the impact of globalization on production and states, and the political and cultural resistance to it by pre-democracy groups in Africa, the Zapatistas in Mexico, other peasant organizations in Latin America, and Islamic groups. The 11 papers were presented at a workshop sponsored by the International Studies Association and the Center for the Study of the Global South, date and location not noted.
Rodrik, Dani. Has Globalization Gone Too Far?. Washington DC: Institute for International Economics, 1997.
Globalization is exposing social fissures between those with the education, skills, and mobility to flourish in an unfettered world market-the apparent "winners"-and those without. These apparent "losers" are increasingly anxious about their standards of living and their precarious place in an integrated world economy. The result is severe tension between the market and broad sectors of society, with governments caught in the middle. Compounding the very real problems that need to be addressed by all involved, the kneejerk rhetoric of both sides threatens to crowd out rational debate. From the United States to Europe to Asia, positions are hardening. Author Dani Rodrik brings a clear and reasoned voice to these questions. Has Globalization Gone Too Far? takes an unblinking and objective look at the benefits-and risks-of international economic integration, and criticizes mainstream economists for downplaying its dangers. It also makes a unique and persuasive case that the "winners" have as much at stake from the possible consequences of social instability as the "losers." As Rodrik points out, ". . . social disintegration is not a spectator sport-those on the sidelines also get splashed with mud from the field. Ultimately, the deepening of social fissures can harm all." --Amazon.com
Sassen, Saskia. Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization. New York: Columbia University Press, 1996.
Examining the rise of private transnational legal codes and supranational institutions such as the World Trade Organization and universal human rights covenants, Sassen argues that sovereignty remains an important feature of the international system, but that it is no longer confined to the nation-state. Sassen argues that a profound transformation is taking place, a partial denationalizing of national territory seen in such agreements as NAFTA and the European Union. Two arenas stand out in the new spatial and economic order: the global capital market and the series of codes and institutions that have mushroomed into an international human rights regime. As Sassen shows, these two quasi-legal realms now have the power and legitimacy to demand accountability from national governments with the ironic twist that both depend upon the state to enforce their goals.
Aaronson, Susan Ariel. Taking to the Streets: The Lost History of Public Efforts to Shape Globalization. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press, 2001.
Guehenno, Jean-Marie. "The Impact of Globalization on Strategy." In Turbulent Peace: The Challenges of Managing International Conflict. Edited by Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson and Pamela Aall, eds. Herndon, VA: USIP Press, July 1, 2001.
In virtue of globalization, the separation between domestic and international affairs is collapsing and local interests cannot be isolated from more global concerns. Globalization in this way changes the nature of threats to be faced and creates a certain instability in the international community. Civil conflict and international terrorism are two threats that stand out.
Friedman, Thomas L. The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization. Anchor Books, May 2, 2000.
"Friedman, the well-traveled New York Times foreign-affairs columnist, peppers The Lexus and the Olive Tree with stories that illustrate his central theme: that globalization--the Lexus--is the central organizing principle of the post-cold war world, even though many individuals and nations resist by holding onto what has traditionally mattered to them--the olive tree. Problem is, few of us understand what exactly globalization means. As Friedman sees it, the concept, at first glance, is all about American hegemony, about Disneyfication of all corners of the earth. But the reality, thank goodness, is far more complex than that, involving international relations, global markets, and the rise of the power of individuals (Bill Gates, Osama Bin Laden) relative to the power of nations." (Amazon.com review)
Clark, John. Worlds Apart: Civil Society and the Battle for Ethical Globalisation. London: Earthscan, 2003.
Return to Top
Examples Illustrating this Topic:
Online (Web) Sources
Goulet, Denis. "Inequalities in the Light of Globalization." , October 2002
Available at: http://www.nd.edu/~krocinst/ocpapers/op_22_2.PDF.
This paper addresses a set of questions related to globalization and the associated increase in global economic inequality. "Great inequalities have risen alongside increasing globalization in recent years, giving rise to the question: what is the relation between the two? Inequalities have always existed, and are not caused directly by globalization, which serves as the vehicle of flawed development." -abstract
Douglas, Oronto and Doifie Ola. "Nigeria: Defending Nature, Protecting Human Dignity - Conflicts in the Niger Delta." , 1999
Available at: Click here for more info.
This article profiles the problems in the Niger Delta, which revolve around globalization, governmental policies regarding resource extraction, as well as social, cultural and economic rights.
Offline (Print) Sources
Stiglitz, Joseph E. Globalization and Its Discontents. W.W. Norton & Company, June 2002.
With this work Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize winner, Columbia University economics professor and former economist in the Clinton Administration, offers his analysis of the economic reprecussions of goloblization. He employs case examples from East Asia and Russia to demonstrate his critical view of globalization. He attempts to answer why so many revile the programs of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization programs, to the point of rioting in the streets.
Khor, Martin. Rethinking Globalization: Critical Issues and Policy Choices. New York: Zed Books, 1999.
Martin Khor's practical proposals offer action agendas to Third World governments as they are faced with globalization. Khor explains the economic globalization process, showing how it is failing to either increase economic growth or decrease poverty. A critique of Western governments for their domination of the international policy process ensues, where Khor exposes the flaws in the "one size fits all" policy prescriptions of the World Bank, IMF, and WTO. Arguing that Third World countries need room to maneuver, this book proposes innovative and realistic policies.
Mittelman, James H. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformations and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.
Here James Mittelman explains the systemic dynamics and myriad consequences of globalization, focusing on the interplay between globalizing market forces, in some instances guided by the state, and the needs of society. Mittelman finds that globalization is hardly a unified phenomenon but rather a syndrome of processes and activities: a set of ideas and a policy framework. More specifically, globalization is propelled by a changing division of labor and power, manifested in a new regionalism, and challenged by fledgling resistance movements. The author argues that a more complete understanding of globalization requires an appreciation of its cultural dimensions. From this perspective, he considers the voices of those affected by this trend, including those who resist it and particularly those who are hurt by it.
Anderson, Sarah, ed. Views from the South: The Effects of Globalization and the WTO on Third World. Chicago: Food First Books, 2000.
A collection of essays that critically assesses the impact of emerging trade law on the developing world. It collectively argues that trade law has been developed by and for the global North.
Wallach, Lori and Michelle Sforza. Whose Trade Organization? Corporate Globalization and the Erosion of Democracy. Washington DC: Public Citizen, 1999.
Argues that the WTO has promulgated strong international law that overrides democratically-constructed domestic law in the interest of multinational corporations.
Whose World Order?: Uneven Globalization and the End of the Cold War. Westview Press, February 1, 1995.
"In this volume, an international cast of contributors comes together to share regional perspectives on questions about peace and security, economic growth and welfare, and democracy and civil society in the post-Cold War world."
Return to Top
|
