Impact of Markets and the Division of Labour on Social Cohesion - Essay Example

?The Impact of Markets and the Division of Labour on Social Cohesion Social cohesion is of great importance especially in the current globalised society where movements and interactions among people from all backgrounds are virtually unavoidable (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 45). People need to make meaningful interactions for purposes of working together, conducting businesses or living with others regardless of their diversities. This requires that every aspect of the human society like education, market structures, production processes, cultures, socialization, spirituality among others should be used as tools of enhancing this cohesion. This paper seeks to find out if markets and the division of labour encourage or discourage social cohesion. Impacts A market can be described as a destination for goods or services intended for sale. This market is composed of customers who are people that are willing and able to purchase the goods or services that are being sold. Social cohesion refers to the ability of people to articulate or embrace each other and co-exist peacefully (Council of Europe 67). It also refers to the ability of various groups of people to hold firmly together consistently. Scholars have revealed that markets and division of labour have had a substantial impact on social cohesion in the current society. Division of labour has led to the separation of markets and employment through the differentiation and separation of production processes (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 55). Instead of producing similar goods and services, the various labourers in the market are sub-divided and allowed to deal with the various specialties of the production processes so as to meet the various market demands. An example of this is a shift from mixed farming to either crop or animal production as separate production lines or dividing the entire work of an organization into different work units, each dealing with a specific task. This shift in the production processes seemingly separates people from coming together and engaging in the production process as a larger group. In a manufacturing industry for example, the work units will be organized around the skill requirements for the various steps of production and marketing like product production, packaging, IT management, sales and marketing, customer relations among others. This gives the impression that division of labour discourages social cohesion. However, a closer look on the mechanisms of division of labour reveals it encourages social cohesion both local and globally through the development of the need to exchange and which in turn brings people together (Council of Europe 117). This is to say that division of labour encourages the need for trade. One country could choose to specialize in producing and supplying a given product basing on their natural and capital, for example oil and gas. On the same note, another country will produce tyres and apparel. Such a situation definitely generates some form of dependency in which case the two countries need each other. The one producing oil and gas needs tyres and apparel and the one producing apparel and tyres needs oil and gas. This gives a picture of the processes of imports and exports that is seen in today’s society. In other words, division of labour defines the lines of production and this means that no person will produce all that they need in life. This creates some deficiencies of the products that a person does not produce and thus the need to obtain it from others. After an examination of division of labour, Smith (25) concluded that unlike the savage or the ancient man, the modern man/woman is highly dependent on the labour of others to satisfy his/her full range of wants. This structure of satisfying human wants has resulted to the need to focus attention to the importance of exchange and therefore the need for increased human interactions both locally and globally. Through international exchanges like imports and exports, people across the globe have been able to come together, interact and co-exist more than ever. In relation to this, the need for such economic interactions can be said to be one of the things that has encouraged the development of the concept of foreign relations in all countries (Council of Europe 87). This is where countries plan on how to relate to other countries. Through the relevant ministries or offices, this concept has become very important in maintaining good relations with trade partners or other countries that are important in other ways to the economy of the country like those that supply power or means of transporting imports and exports. The above discussion points to the fact that people engage in division of labour because of the attractive rates of returns related to dealing with specific lines of production. According to Smith (26), resources tend to move between to and from employments where there exist differences in the rates of return. This shows that although division of labour separates and apportions different groups of people some special task in the economy, there exists a natural balance of industry in the human society and interdependence among these producers. It, therefore, reveals the natural connectedness of all trades on the globe and how the various markets and division of labour have led to the development of a society where mankind is highly dependent on each other. This interdependence has encouraged peaceful and constructive human interactions among people. There is less reliance on barter trade in the modern society due to the increased and more complex volumes of exchange. At the same time, division of labour is more pronounced compared to the past. Division of labour increases production to an extent that it makes it cumbersome for individuals to move around with their commodities to sell or exchanging them with others as in the case of barter trade. This kind of production best fits large and modern markets, like those that exist in urban areas. For example, a shoe manufacture cannot set up their business in a remote village because this is a weak market. In large markets, customers are readily available and have a high purchasing power. This means that contrary to small markets, a large market pulls together many people who are dedicated to different jobs (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 76). In a given place, one will find both related and unrelated businesses thriving together. For example, cloth making, vehicle assembling, hotel and food industries. This is a picture of the situation in many towns. The existence of such industries in one place and the resultant high population in urban areas indicates that large markets are very powerful in encouraging social cohesion. Many societies are experiencing more rural to urban migration than urban to rural migration. This division of labour has necessitated the development of physical markets which act as common places for exchange; every commodity is largely exchanged for money. The butcher, tailor, brewer, bakers, tyre manufacturer among other producers carry their products to the market where they exchange them for money of an equal value (Smith 91). Such markets bring people together for purposes of making the highly needed exchanges and this is a proof that division of labour encourages social cohesion. Similarly, markets encourage social cohesion. People labour for their own consumption but when this production surpasses personal demands, people have to look for markets for disposing for something valuable. These markets, therefore, provide channels through which people can exchange the excesses they have produced over and above their own consumption (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 75). Their relationship with the target market is one of the determinants of reception of products and potential sales. However, social cohesion resulting from the existence of a market is restricted by the size of the market. Smith (81) states that when the market is very small, people will not be encouraged to dedicate themselves to one employment because they will be forced to reduce their exchange power or volume of production. In order to benefit fully, people in such a place will be forced to engage in more than one line of production. A village with a scarce population is an example of such a market. In this market, every man is the farmer, tailor, baker and butcher of his family. This means that the lack of division of labour reduces their need for goods or services produced by others and thus their need to interact and exchange products with others. This is different from large markets, which attract people with various specialties to one place as mentioned above. There are some types of industrial productions that cannot be done anywhere else expect in large towns, and if it is done outside such a society, it will not succeed as such. An example of this is pottery. A village setting provides a very small market for such a business and the pots can only attract low prices. This means that pottery in a village cannot afford potters a constant and substantial income. This situation is different in urban areas where the resources, time, and skills for making pots are scarce, and people are willing to part with extra cash to obtain the product. Given the high and the economically endowed urban population, the powerful market in towns is one of the things that encourage cohesion. Urban areas also act like epicenters for people from various cultural backgrounds from within the nation and other countries. Apart from converging for purposes of benefiting from the large market that exists in towns, these people have got the chance of meeting, socializing and even integrating with people from other cultural backgrounds (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 132). The division of work in the workplace also increases social cohesion in that the people in the various work units get to work and interact more closely than before (Council of Europe 201). Businesses are facing stiffer competitions daily. This has necessitated the embracing of advanced methods of production including the use of information and technology systems. This indicates that production that meets the needs of today’s markets require a more skilled workforce. The result of this is increased valuation of education. Such pressures have led to an educational boom where universities and technical colleges have now turned some of the noble social institutions. Apparently, the major focus of many governments and families is that as many of their children as possible to attain university education. This increased importance of higher learning is one of the most effective ways of enhancing social cohesion. These institutions are more accommodative to students from various cultural and religious backgrounds compared to elementary and secondary levels of education. This is mainly necessitated by their scarcity compared to elementary and secondary schools. For example, there could be only ten universities in a state that specialize in engineering or medicine, and they must receive students from the thousands of high schools as well as international students. Counterarguments There is a significant amount of evidence indicating that market and division of labour encourage social cohesion both at the local and global levels (Furze, Savy, Brym & Lie 80). However, it is also important to acknowledge the evidences that argue in opposition of this. One of such arguments is that division of labour discourages social cohesion especially among people of different social, economic and educational levels. One of the classic examples that Smith (38) gives is that division of labour has contributed to the growth of the economy through subdivision and simplification of various production processes. In this way, division of labour has confined the production activities of a worker to lesser operations leading to the development of a physical barrier to social cohesion. Every employee gets in the workplace and focuses on their assigned duties. The development of an intellectual barrier to social cohesion can also be seen in the above situation. Such separation and confinement of workers to different workstations pose the risk of rendering their minds ignorant and stupid because it does not offer them a stimulus to exercise their mind. This scenario has widened the gap between the ordinary man and the philosopher or his employer. Division of labour has also led to the assigning of core production processes to the skilled and highly paid workforce while the others do not earn as much (Council of Europe 211). This has increased the development of socio-economic stratification which negatively effects the development of social cohesion in the workforce and society. Conclusion Division of labour leads to the division and specialisation in production and different people are confined to different production sites. This separation threatens the level of social cohesion that exists in a society. However, an analysis of the effect of division of labour and markets indicate that they encourage social cohesion in many ways. Generally, division of labour limits what a person produces, which creates deficiencies in the products that they do not produce. They have to obtain it from others and also seek people to sell their surpluses to. The general picture that becomes evident is that the need for economic growth increases the acceptance and need for peaceful co-existence with of people from more diverse backgrounds. Works Cited Adam Smith (1976) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. G. Bell and Sons. Council of Europe. Reconciling Labour Flexibility with Social Cohesion: Ideas for Political Actio. Council of Europe. 2006. Print. Furze, Brian , Savy, Pauline , Brym, Robert , Lie, John . Sociology in Today's World, Edition2. Cengage Learning. 2011. Print. Read More