Global Production Networks - Literature review Example

Geographies of Economies Global production networks (GPN) can be said to be those where operations are serviced in an independent manner, and these often consist of products, which are easy to produce. While this is the case, one will find that such products are usually very difficult to transport over long distances due to the high costs involved. In addition, there can be global integration of production where marketing is often conducted in a manner that is reflective of the domestic preferences of the consumers of the various areas where products are sold. Because of this process, one would say that there is interdependence between the various markets involved especially in matters concerning marketing (Berndt & Boeckler, 2011). As a result, the activities, which take place in the markets, are completely unrelated to each other and the developments on each do not affect one another. Furthermore, GPN can also be globally integrated and these often involve structures of production that are located in diverse countries and these often entail products, which can be considered complex. In this process, it is often extremely important to ensure that there is enough logistical support because this is the only means through which the capabilities of production and distribution can be brought together in an effective way. It is for this reason that there is constant interdependency in productivity, because the entire movement of a product through the supply chain has a direct impact not only on the value of the final product, but on its price as well (Reimer, 2009). The commodification of nature has come to be a very important part of study in the area of business as well as in environmental studies. It is a study that is based on the ways in which natural resources and processes are made redeemable through the market, and the implications that come with it (Yeung & Lin, 2003). The large corporations that have come to dominate the globe in a variety of ways have done so at the expense of the natural environment. It is a fact that the corporations, which have a global influence, are doing everything in their power to make a profit and this has come to rely upon their extensive use of natural resources through massive exploitation. In fact, most of the corporations all over the world are no longer following the set regulations in their use of natural resources, and it can be said that they are using these resources in a way which is not ethical (Cook, Hobson, Hallett, et al, 2011). These corporations have come to gain unprecedented power because of their massive influence in the political arena as well as the great monetary capacity that they have to influence environmental policies in their favour. While this has been the case, in recent years, many corporations have come to receive many backlashes from the public as well as some governments concerning what is termed as their unfair usage of natural resources. The fact that they make profits at the expense of the natural environment is one of the reasons that they have come to develop a very bad reputation (Tolia-Kelly, 2010). Political ecology is the study of the connections between political, economic and social factors with ecological issues and changes, and it is based on the politicisation of the ecological process. Several issues have been raised concerning whether the creation of an environmental protection regime that is joint is necessary and whether this regime is going to be sufficient in controlling environmental problems globally (Hollander, 2006). This is because of the fact that such a creation would be going against the customary way of thinking when dealing with issues concerning the environment. The idea that countries are sovereign in matters dealing with the environment have come to be challenged since at present, organisations other than governments have come to be key players in the environmental issue. There has been a shift from having meetings concerning the protection of the environment, and these have led to the implementation of initiatives that are localized through the formation of partnerships. This has been done in order to be able to come up with the solutions for the environmental problems that affect various countries (Hall, 2012). It has become the trend among governments to move their strategies towards the involvement of those tactics, which are able to enhance the prospects that will implement effective management of the environment starting from the local level of the society. Because of the various initiatives that have been put in place by environmental organisations, there has been cooperation between the political, economic, and social sphere to ensure that the environment is protected (McNevin, 2007). Globalisation has brought about what can be termed as cultural relativism in matters of consumption and this can be said to be the notion that all faiths, norms, and principles or values are relative to individuals within their own social contexts. The spreading of this ideology has been of an effect that is a direct opposite to what individuals who oppose the globalization believe. Many of the opponents of globalization have said that its main effect is the continued erosion of local consumer cultures, in favour of the more dominant, western one. However, as seen above, globalization has led to the spread of change in consumption culture, where there is a belief that all consumer cultures in the world should be treated as equal, whether their influence is great or small (Bridge, 2011). The idea of right or wrong in the consumer culture have become relative to the culture within which it is being practiced. This has come to suggest that what is believed to be a morally wrong consumer culture in one society or culture may not be deemed to be so in another. The need to have cultural consumer relativism in the world has come out of a desire to better understand the consumer habits, which are not an individual’s own, and to treat them as having equal value. This is a direct effect of globalization as cultures, which previously functioned apart from one another, have now been brought together, and in some areas, they exist hand in hand (Boeckler & Berndt, 2013). This means that however much people might feel about other consumer cultures, they have to accept them because not to do so would mean losing the benefits that comes with changes in the said culture. Gender roles have come to play a very important role in the geographies of economies, and in fact, it can be said to be a very common state that can be found among most of the world’s people and countries. One of the reasons why gender has come to play such a prominent role is because of the fact that many societies do not often consider women to be a significant part of the economy. Furthermore, their governments are also blamed for pursuing policies that actually harm the successful development of gender parity among their people (Hall, 2009; Pike, 2009). There is, however, deeper and global causes of discrimination based on gender and race on matters concerning the economy, and these are rarely discussed because their effects are mostly indirect. There are behind the rising connectedness promised by globalization those decisions, economic policies and practices that are typically influenced or formulated by individuals from a certain gender or race to the exclusion of all others (Hughes, 2005). Such people can be the leaders in the political sphere, or the heads of multinational corporations and institutions and in the face of their massive influence, individuals tend to be left out because of their race or gender, thus ensuring that they are not active participants in the economy. It can be said that globalisation has brought about the unification of once disparate economies to varying degrees. The growth of a globalised economy, it has been argued, is one of the most disturbing aspects of modern life in the world because it has become a basic part of life despite its benefitting only a few individuals (Tolia-Kelly, 2013). The disadvantages of geographies of economies can be said to have began when many people immigrated to the cities from rural areas in an attempt to get jobs in order to improve their lives. While this was the case, their dreams did not always come true because of the fact that these people did not always get the jobs that they had expected in the cities. This led them to a situation where they were forced to make a living in whatever way they found possible but if all was lost, they tended to end up living on the streets. In the modern world, many issues concerning geographies of economies have to be dealt with and these include the environment, gender, race, consumer culture, among many others (Ryder, 2007). As a result, it has become imperative for businesses to put these factors into consideration to ensure that they remain relevant in the current environment. The ability to bring together aspect of production and distribution are among the most appealing features of GPN, which have been brought about by globalisation, and it is this that has worked towards the unification of the global economy. References Boeckler, M. & Berndt, C. 2013, "Geographies of circulation and exchange III: The great crisis and marketization after markets", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 424-432. Berndt, C. & Boeckler, M. 2011, "Geographies of markets: Materials, morals and monsters in motion", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 559-567. Bridge, G. 2011, "Resource geographies 1: Making carbon economies, old and new", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 820-834. Cook, I., Hobson, K., Hallett, L., Guthman, J., Murphy, A., Hulme, A., Sheller, M., Crewe, L., Nally, D., Roe, E., Mather, C., Kingsbury, P., Slocum, R., Imai, S., Duruz, J., Philo, C., Buller, H., Goodman, M., Hayes-Conroy, A., Hayes-Conroy, J., Tucker, L., Blake, M., Le Heron, R., Putnam, H., Maye, D. & Henderson, H. 2011, "Geographies of food: Afters", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 104-120. Hall, S. 2012, "Geographies of money and finance II: Financialization and financial subjects", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 403-411. Hall, S. 2009, "Ecologies of business education and the geographies of knowledge", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 599-618. Hollander, G.M. 2006, "Subject to control: shifting geographies of race and labour in US sugar agroindustry, 1930-1950", Cultural Geographies, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 266-292. Hughes, A. 2005, "Geographies of exchange and circulation: alternative trading spaces", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 496-504. McNevin, A. 2007, "Irregular migrants, neoliberal geographies and spatial frontiers of the political", Review of International Studies, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 655. Pike, A. 2009, "Geographies of brands and branding", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 619-645. Reimer, S. 2009, "Geographies of production III: knowledge, cultural economies and work (revisited)", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 677-684. Ryder, A. 2007, "Global Geographies of Post-Socialist Transition", Geography, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 308-309. Tolia-Kelly, D. 2013, "The geographies of cultural geography III: Material geographies, vibrant matters and risking surface geographies", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 153-160. Tolia-Kelly, D. 2010, "The geographies of cultural geography I: identities, bodies and race", Progress in Human Geography, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 358-367. Yeung, H.W. & Lin, G.C.S. 2003, "Theorizing economic geographies of Asia", Economic Geography, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 107-128. Read More