An Evaluation of Globalisation from Two Perspectives

An Evaluation of Globalisation from Two PerspectivesEvaluation of Globalisation from Two Perspectives.As an Emotive Force, in Being Beneficial and a primordial toFuture World Economic Development as swell up asBeing Inevitable and Irreversible.And as a Force that Increases Inequality Within and mingled with Nations, Threatens Employment andLiving Standards and Thwarts Social ProgressIntroductionGlobalisation as a word is that utilized in differing contexts within the public lexicon. It is one of the closely widely used- and misused keyword in recent long time, as well as being , one of the most rarely putd, the most nebulous and misunderstood, as well as the most policy-makingly effective (Beck and Camiller, 2000, p. 19). We tend to think of world(a)ization is as a modern term, first defined in the Merriam Webster Dictionary in 1944 (University of Pennsylvania, 2005) its historical roots in terms of it being a part of human history can be traced back at least 5,000 years (W allerstein et al, 1980, p. 15). Said beginnings, In the fifteenth and early sixteenth century is when the European world-economy came into existence as a kind of social arranging the world (had) in reality kn induce before and which is the distinctive feature of the modern world-system (Wallerstein et al, 1980, p. 15). The underpinnings of why Wallerstein et al (1980, p. 15) take this view is that is understanded an scotch rather than political entity that differed from the empires, city-states and nation-states that preceded it. Eisnstadt (1968, P. 41) helps to clarify the prior by defining empire as a term utilized to designate a political system bosoming wide, relatively high centralize territories which consisted of an emperor and central political institutions And while empires were a primitive soakeds by which economic domination was conducted, they laid the foundations for globalization by means of economic flows as represented by trade (Eisenstadt, 1961, pp. 82-107).The precedent has been utilized as an historical guide to the roots of globalization, which is generally impute as being the individual credited with using it in an economic sense (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). Levitts definition of globalisation is based upon its applicability to corporations and outputs and what he termed as homogenized demand (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). That view, while rotatory at the time, in hindsight is a narrow conception of the broader concept that we understand globalisation to be in todays terms. Shariff (2003, pp. 163-178) states that globalisation is the global border representing the homogenising of prices, wages, products, interest rates and profits that relies upon three forces, 1. human migration, 2. foreign trade, and 3. the swift movement of capital along with the integration of financial markets. Bhaqwati (2005, p. 3) advises that globalisation can mean m whatsoever things. He focuses on globalisation as being economic, constitut ing the integration of national economies into the international economy with trade, direct foreign investment (by corporations and multinationals), defraud term capital flows, international flows of workers and . flows of technology (Bhaqwati, 2005, p. 3).The World Bank, which agrees with Beck and Camiller (2000, p. 19) and states that there is no precise and universally agreed upon definition and, adds that over time it, globalisation, has come to encompass ethnic, political and early(a) connotations in addition to the economic (PREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group, 2005). Their explanation of globalisation tends to focus on the economic side of the ledger, but adds that it, globalisation, is not uniform stating that in the poorer lesser developed countries it is more a case of being excluded from it rather than being impoverished by it (PREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group, 2005). Hirst and Thompson (2001. p. 3) agree with the fa ct that there are broadly differing contexts attached to globalisation and that in todays terms it largely means placing economic aspects in the forefront, keeping in mind the cultural, political, and social variables that are intertwined. The International Monetary Fund (2000) combines pieces of definitions from the predate in stating that globalisation represents a historical transit which is attributable to human innovation and technological progress, and refers to the increasing integration of economies on a global primer coat particularly through trade and financial flows.Stiglitz (2003, p. 4) asks the question as to Why has globalization a force that has brought so much good become so controversial? Bhaqwati (2005, p. 4) withal asks this question as to Why are the critics of globalization so agitated? Hist and Thompson (2001. p. 2) also are quizzical as to this phenomenon. What is it about globalisation that has proponents lined up on one side, and antagonists on the another(prenominal)? This examination shall overheark to equate both(prenominal) sides of this highly charged plain, looking at the views that see globalisation as an emotive force, where some see it as a process that is beneficial, representing a key to future global economic reading that is not only inevitable, but irreversible as well. And on the other side of the fence there are those that view globalisation with hostility, and believe that is increases inequality among nations as well as within them, threatens employment along with living standards and thwarts social progress.According to Giddens (2006), we are in the second phase of the debate on globalisation. His perspective is that there were discussions regarding the phase and attempting to determine what is was and is while it was unfolding. Giddens (2006) views us as being in the second phase of the debate as globalisation is firmly entrenched in economics, politics, cultural and social areas, as we again atte mpt to determine what it is, along with its consequences and how it can be properly accommodated. Whether one subscribes to this view is a matter of opinion, but the point is there is a debate on globalisation with one side seeing it as representing benefits to society, and the other as promoting inequalities and other negative connotations. Or, is that actually the case? Could it be that it is parts of globalisation that opponents are against? Could it be that the problem with globalisation is its inequality in that there are the nations gaining from it and distancing themselves from those fall behind or being left behind? The questions are almost endless. In seeking to reach a determination, this examination will look at both side of the globalisation issue, offering those facets for and those against it.Ohmae (Ray, 2005) sees globalisation as the liberalisation of individuals, consumers, business corporations as well as regions from the confines of the nation state. He sees the world as representing a global village because wealth will migrate across national borders. He sees, in commercial terms, as well as in consumer terms that the world is an progressively borderless economy, a true global marketplace with political influences seeking to control the process (Ohmae, 1996, p. 8). Yip (1989, p. 29) sees the process of globalisation as a must facet that major business corporations have to participate in as a result of almost all products having foreign competitors. This preceding view not only means that a family needs to look at this from its own domestic market and staving off competition, but also from the viewpoint of growth and profits as there are customers to be won in foreign markets as well (Yip, 1989, p. 29).Yips bodied focus on globalisation looks at falling trade barriers as governments and regions understand the importance of opening their markets to enable them to enter others in a mastication pro quo. The corporate process of globalisa tion results in change magnitude competition, jobs, better products, innovation and lower prices as the lines between products, goods and services have become increasingly transparent, with consumers as the beneficiaries in the process. The opening up of markets, and the loosening of trade restrictions and borders is a positive contribution of globalisation as it makes the new battlefield one of profits, markets and working out as opposed to conquest, war and destruction (Held et al, 1999. pp. 32-35).Globalisations main engine has been a result of economics, it is money that has underpinned the flow of products, printed materials, the Internet, documentaries and other informational exchanges, along with products, goods and services. The elements of increased trade have brought the need to stabilize currencies in order to rent the corporations within countries to effectively compete on the global stage and is an important underpinning resulting in the formation of the euro in the European Union. The foregoing has brought about a high degree of economic interdependence among todays economies and the preceding reflects the historical phylogenesis of the worlds economic and political order (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3).Evidence of the equalization process of globalisation can be found in the example of the unify States which was the most dominate economic and political nation after the end of World War II (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3). This has been referred to as neocolonialism, which represents Imperial antecedents controlling other societies through economic means on the international stage, which resurfaced after WW II, having similarities to the colonialism periods of the sixteenth through twentieth centuries (Selfa, 2002). The foregoing is driven by economic means as capitalism represents an economic mode that operate within an arena larger than any political entity can totally control (Wallerstein, 1976, pp. 230). The preceding has provided capitalists, and thus globalisation, with the foundation to go after consistent economic expansion of the world-system which Wallerstein (1976, pp. 230) argues is skewed in its distribution of rewards. Globalisation is thus a combination of political aims to strengthen national economies through political power, authority and forms of rule (Held et al, 1999, p. 32) that aids capitalism, business and companies.Globalisation has since evened the playing field as nations, regions and countries have devoted their efforts into strengthening their competitive positions in the commerce arena through regional trading blocks such as the European Union, ASEAN, SAARC, Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other organizations evolved the world community into a complicated system based on a growing interdependence among nations (Carbaugh, 2006, p. 3). China has risen from a developing nation into a world power through its ring into capitalism via the innovation of socialist economics, which retains the centralized Party control. Globalisation has aided in the preceding as well as the development of the Chinese armed forces into a sophisticated technologically equipped force (Wortzel, 1994, pp. 168-170). The market reforms of 1978 has enabled the country to harness the commercial potential of its market of 1.3 billion citizens under socialism with Chinese characteristics which has transformed China from the 32nd largest trading nation in 1978 to second in terms of GDP purchasing power behind the United States (Dellios, 2004). The power of participation in the international flows of globalisation has turn up its ability and potential to transform economies and nations as well as the economic balances of power.Globalisation is for most intents and purposes a Western dominated process that is influenced and guided by corporations. In pursuing international markets multinational corporations have opted on a course of standardising their product lines to permit them to mak e adaptations to reach foreign consumers in the quest for increased market share (Hayler, 2006). Localisation represents the adaptation of products, goods and or services to address the tastes, preferences, cultural and other requirements of a specific target market (W3C, 2007). A key example of standardisation combined with localisation can be found in take-away telephones. Companies need a standardised approach to the production of basic components in a globalised economy for framing, wiring and related components to permit a universal broadcast of manufacture. With facilities in 15 countries and sales in over 130, Nokia is a prime example of a globalised company (Nokia, 2001). However, individual markets require localisation to appeal to consumers in the face of competition, as well as the recognition of preferences, tastes and needs. Nokia innovated the first mobile phone that was designed to provide commands in English, Chinese, Thai, Bahasa for In through with(p)sia and Ma laysia, and Spanish for the Philippine market (Hoberg-Petersen et al, 1999). The preceding is an example of the combined utilization of standardisation and localisation required to capture consumers in the competitive globalised marketplace. Nokias deft understanding of the variables of the international marketplace represent the application of Porters (1998, pp. 59-61) value chain organization, which represents the various activities inside as well as outside a company, equating logistics, operations, marketing and sales, abide activities, procurement, technology development, company cornerstone and utilizing the inputs and results from these activities to better operations by adapting and changing where needed to meet the demands of the marketplace.The importance of an international stance in the todays global economy enables corporations to cope with international competition by leveraging their domestic operations overseas and learns lessons from the unique characteristics of foreign markets to bring back to its own domestic market. The preceding expands the companys innovation by coming to grips with specialized needs that can translate into new features and approaches that boost sales. Accepting the article of faith of globalisation is not a luxury that companies can afford to ignore in the face of foreign competition. It is an undeniable facet of competition as any product, goods or services that has a representative market domestically, will be under attack sooner or later by some company or companies seeking to expand. Evidence of the impact of globalisation is shown by the fact that the ratio of exports plus imports as calculated against the global gross domestic product has increased from 16% in 1960 to 40% in 2001 (World Bank, 2002). The forgoing seemingly suggests that localizing products, goods and services from a standardised format to meet the needs of individual markets has proven successful. But, in the larger scheme of things, is globalis ation actually helping to increase inequalities between nations and threatening living standards, social progress and employment? As in all questions, there are two sides to every story.The preceding is a highly complex principle to equate as well as measure, as such is dependent upon the relative sophistication of a countrys ability to meet the varied demands of globalisation called for through institutions, infrastructure development, educational systems, captain and skilled worker training and development, access to raw materials, governmental practices and internal policies. It is simple enough to look at examples of inequality, and related factors, however, in the case of Africa and Latin America, they have only recently opened their markets, beginning in the 1980s, as opposed to the United States, Europe and Japan, which were all engaged in the process before long after World War II (Bardhan, 2006). China adopted market reforms and changed the precepts of socialism to accomm odate a process that enabled them to harness their educational, industrial and internal systems and infrastructure to utilize globalisation to reinforce the power of the state. Their example points to the internal resourcefulness of government to utilize means to transform the way things were done, into what they viewed as needing to be done (Bardhan, 2006). In a free market system inequalities mark the underpinnings of the business process as companies seek lowered costs via which to produce what they are in business for. Such means moving facilities and or processes to those locales that will enable them to maintain quality, but cut costs, and labor, represents the largest cost item.In a report name A Compendium of Inequality (Martens, 2005) which refers to a United Nations Development Report published in 2005, found that approximately fifty countries, of the total one degree centigrade and seventy-five countries studied, lost ground in terms of their economic standing, GDP and other areas. In order to achieve economic progress, reduce poverty and improve their quality of action, developing countries need increased employment opportunities, improved labor productivity and governmental incentives to attract industry and business as well as to develop them internally. Achievement of the foregoing requires a sustained productivity growth along with increased capacity of the countrys populace in skills and development that will foster the conditions for the attraction of multinational companies and permit the country to compete on the international stage (Little, 2005). Multinational companies bring with them advanced production and commission techniques as well as offer increased wages in terms of relative practices thus increasing the standards, thereby attracting the better labor from the lendable employment pool. The process is slow, yet effective, and the foregoing represent facets used by China, India, Brazil, and the Asian Tigers, South Korea, Taiwan , Hong Kong and Singapore, that aided these countries in making progress in global commerce.ConclusionGlobalisation can trace its roots back over 5,000 years, with the modern application of the term credited to Levitt (Tedlow and Abdelal, 2005). The consistent evolution of globalisation has caused theorists and scholars to define and redefine the term with the understanding that in its present complexities that there is no universally agreed upon definition to adequately describe the process that includes economics, social processes, cultural facets, political considerations and the complex entangled web of interdependent relationships these areas have. In this examination, the term globalisation has been narrowed to focus on its economic and business ramifications in examining whether the process is beneficial, and a key to future world economic development that is inevitable and irreversible, or is it a process that promotes inequality within as well as between nations that threat ens employment along with living standards and thwarts social progress. And while globalisation does have its less than desirable effects, it has proven its worth in lowering international borders to increase trade, migration and stabilize currency and capital flows in an era that has seen unprecedented growth in innovation, communications and the seeking of a better understanding of cosmoss needs.The process is not going to disappear or reverse itself as whether we like it or not, the world is driven by economics and the interests of corporations to cede profits on behalf of stockholders, and stakeholders in addition to the vested self interests of governments to protect and foster favorable business conditions for corporations that generate employment and pay taxes to support the political structure. The preceding has been and will continue to be an interdependent relationship that has existed since the Chinese dynasties, through the Egyptian era, as well as the Greek and Roman empires. It is not a question of what direction the world is going in, but one of the direction the world has always been going. Corporations are not going to disappear and our way of life that has been evolving change. Commerce, trade and the migration of people has always been with us, globalisation is just the present form that has manifested itself as have as conquests, exploration and wars in addition to trade and commerce been the former means that mankind has utilized from the beginnings of civilisation.As history has taught us, the more advanced nations use the less advanced to further their ends, with the offshoot of the process that the weaker nations through this association, become stronger and sooner or later establish their own independence and dominance in a never ending cycle of ebbs and flows that has seen shifts in political and economic power. Such was the case with the British empire, the rise of the United States, the emergence of the European Union, the develop ment of regional trading blocks and the ascension of China. This examination has shown that while globalisation does have its inequalities and less than desirable points, it, as in all human endeavours, is an evolutionary process that is still learning from itself. As we progress as a race of peoples, so to does our understanding of our mistakes and the drive to correct them. Institutions such as the United Nations are proof of this evolutionary process. Thus, the faults in globalisation do not lie in its process, but in our application of them, which those whom opposed to it aiding in pointing out its shortcomings. As we learn, we listen and reshape ourselves to devise ways to better get along ourselves as well as humankind. The examples presented herein point to the foregoing.BibliographyBardham, P. (2006) Does Globalization Help or Hurt the Worlds Poor. 26 March 2006. Scientific AmericanBeck, U., Camiller, P. (2000) What is Globalization. Polity tweetBhaqwati, J. (2005) In defe nse of Globalization. Oxford University PressCarbaugh, R. (2006) International Economics. Academic Internet Publishers, Inc.Dellios, R. (2004) The Rise of China as a Global Power. Retrieved on 29 January 2007 from http//www.international-relations.com/CM6-2WB/GlobalChinaWB.htmEisenstadt, S. (1968) Empires. International Encyclopedia of the Social SciencesEisenstadt, S. (1961) The Causes of Disintegration and Fall of Empires Sociological and Historical Analysis. Vol. 34. DiogenesGiddens, A. (2006) The Second Globalization Debate. Retrieved on 27 January 2007 from http//www.edge.org/3rd_culture/giddens/giddens_index.htmlHayler, A. (2006) Standardization is not the answer to the gainsay of globalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//www.businessintelligence.com/ex/asp/code.145/xe/article.htmHeld, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., Perraton, J. (1999) Global Transformations Politics, Economics and Culture. Stanford University PressHirst, P., Thompson, G. (2001) Globalization in Question The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Polity PressHoberg-Petersen, T., Stuart, C., Wetstone, R. (1999) Nokia Mobile Phones A Lesson in International Strategy. Yale School of ManagementInternational Monetary Fund (2000) Globalization Threat or Opportunity. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//www.imf.org/ away/np/exr/ib/2000/041200.htmINokia (2001) Nokia Helps Lead IT Industry to Customers with Disabilities. Retrieved on 29 January 2007 from http//www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/projserv_ps/projects/case_studies/nokia.htmOhmae, K. (1996) End of the Nation State The Rise of Regional Economies. TouchstonePorter, M. (1998) Competitive good Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free PressPREM Economic Policy Group and Development Economics Group (2005) Assessing Globalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//www1.worldbank.org/economicpolicy/globalization/documents/AssessingGlobalizationP1.pdfRay, J (2005) Ohmaes instigative Definition of Gl obalization. Retrieved on 18 January 2007 from http//www.heritagetidbits.com/archives/2005/08/ohmaeas_subvers.htmSelfa, L. (2002) A New Colonial Age of Empires? May-June 2002. International Socialist ReviewShariff, I. (2003) Global Economic Integration Prospects and Problems. Vol. 1, tell apart 2. International Journal of Development EconomicsStigliz, J. (2003) Globalization and its Discontents. W.W. Norton CompanyTedlow, R., Addelal, R. (2005) Theodore Levitts The Globalization of Markets An Evaluation After Two Decades. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/79/07879685/0787968579.pdfUniversity of Pennsylvania (2005) A Very Long-Term View Globalization Since the Fourteenth Century. Retrieved on 27 January 2007 from http//www.sas.upenn.edu/dludden/global1.htmW3C (2007) Localizations vs. Internationalization. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-i18nWallerstein, I. (1976) The Modern World-System Capital ist agriculture and the Origins of the European World Economy in the one-sixteenth Century. New York Academic PressWallerstein, I, Tilly, C., Shorter, E. (1980) The Modern World-System I Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Academic PressWorld Bank (2002) Financing the Poorest Countries. Retrieved on 28 January 2007 from http//www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2002/09/06/000094946_02082404015853/Rendered/INDEX/multi0page.txtWortzel, L. (1994) China Pursues Great Power Status. Vol. 38, Issue 2. OrbisYip, G. (1989) Global strategy in a world of nations. Vol. 30. Sloan Management Review