Globalization of the Modern World - Essay Example

Prof: Globalization People all over the world are more in touch with each other today than they were in previous years. Money andinformation flow quickly that they ever did in the history of mankind and the face of the earth. Industries produce goods and services from one part of the world and convey them to the other side of the globe is never a problem. International communication is more frequent, and international travel is commonplace. No one can deny that globalization is an economic and social tidal wave that is widespread over the globe. It is impossible to stop globalization, and the advantages will always outweigh the negatives. The argument is straightforward: globalization carries more advantages than disadvantages, but there is no denial that it has its downsides; for there is nothing that can be completely perfect. Below, this essay presents how the advantages outweigh the disadvantages giving sufficient evidence as to why everyone should support and embrace the phenomenon. Advantages Global citizenship It is undeniable that many regard globalization as an economic, political, technological, and social force, and this has made people attain global citizenship. Besides accepting that globalization is a force that sweeps across all fields and domains, many acknowledge that the phenomenon is unstoppable. The ever-faster fluid and flawless flow of information across the world have made people come to the realization of the myriad lifestyles, preferences, tastes, and cultures of people from other countries. Through this fluid flow of information and diffusion of technologies, almost everyone – at differing speeds and at varying economic terms – is becoming a global citizen. Regardless of origin or identity, people from all corners of the earth are increasingly realizing and accepting the role as world citizens. Today, people desire and value diversity. It is very common to interact with people who have a comprehension of how the whole world operates socially, politically, culturally, environmentally, and technologically. Further, the outrage makes global citizenship manifest that people portray when they hear of social or environmental injustices. Global citizens are more willing to behave in a manner that ensures the world is a sustainable and equitable place (Shallcross and Robinson 94). For these reasons, global citizens participate and contribute to their immediate communities as well as international scenes in positive ways. Global citizenship means more that unification of people from all ends of the world; it means better accountability among nations. We all know that environmental issues have become a global concern over the recent years as a result of globalization. Inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations are working hard to nurture global environmental justice by increasing democratic accountability and transparency. There is no glimmer of doubt that non-governmental organizations act as extensive advocates of the environment often playing the role of implementing policies and laws that touch on the environment. The recognition that non-governmental organizations have an important role serves an essential role in environmental decisions, and globalization is continuing to increase their participation in transparency and accountability of domestic and international institutions (Shallcross and Robinson 95). Still, globalization promises even more benefits with regards to accountability. Imagine a universal register, balance sheet, evaluating the relative proportions of impunity and accountability. Clearly, much of the corruption and impunity cases we see are deeply rooted in local politics, engendered by governments that, in many nations, treat sections of the populace with benign cruelty, or worse, with absolute neglect (Sperling 2). Global Supply Chain Critics and opponents of the wonderful phenomenon of globalization often find themselves taking advantage of the benefits of the same globalization they stand against. Everyone, including critics of globalization, desires to drive big fancy cars such as Toyotas or BMWs. We all desire to work in technology giants such as IBM notebook, or Apple, communicate with IOS or Android phones, wear Nike sneakers or Zara apparels, drink Pepsi, eat McDonald’s, travel with the best the best form of carrying luggage, and entertain the young ones with video games and technologies such as PlayStation. The list is endless, but at least everyone considers most of the above mentioned things as essential things in life. The desires to enjoy the fruits of globalization come out clear in consumer behavior. These products can only reach consumers through the pathways that have sprung as a result of globalization. The market frontiers for desirable products and services are no longer elucidated in geographical or political terms. Instead, it is the core value of the services and products that define the appeal of various products and services (Kluyver 3). Accept it or not, the world is a global village, and everyone, supporter or critic, enjoys the benefits of globalization. Over the recent past, global supply chains have grown unprecedentedly ushering myriad benefits to the poor and developing nations. Global supply chains are directly connected to the increased foreign investment in food markets and agricultural commodities all over the world. As a result, an increase in safety standards and food quality in developed nations have spread to developing as well as transition nations. In addition to that, the level of high-value exports of foods from emerging economies has risen. These developments have led to theatrical increase in investment by the universal retail chains or supermarkets in developing, transition, and emerging countries. Very recently, India, China, and Russia stood as the top three places of preference for investors owning multinational retail outlets. Not surprisingly, developments in the global supply chain are imposing positive changes on fishermen, farmers, and households in transition and developing nations (Swinnen 1). In the wake of globalization, manufacturers from all corners of the world have had to conform to high standards in food commodities, agriculture, and electronic production systems just to name a few areas. Business Activity and Emerging Economies Globalization is credited for the shift in the center of gravity by increasing the narrowing the development index gap between rich and poor countries. The swift emergence of several developing nations, especially the BRIC nations, which include Brazil, India, Russia, and China, is the most recent development that is giving the global environment of competition shape. The effect of the BRIC countries development on global competition at the moment is enormous. In the future, these countries will impact global competition in unprecedented levels. This is ostensibly the exponential growth of the countries’ gross domestic product (GDP), disposable income, and trade. The absolute size of markets in developing nations is now widening, particularly in China and India. Their speedy rates of growth will shift the center of gravity for business activity far more than growth rates affected business activity before globalization got its proper place in society (Norberg 11). In the modern day, countries such as Japan and South Korea feature in the global markets through their remarkable products, and nations all over the world recognize their significant impact in the economy. This alteration in the equilibrium of business activity has changed the definition of global opportunity. For the past fifty, the globalization of commercial activity has fundamentally been boosted by the expansion of business from developed nations. Today, however, emerging nations are proving themselves worthy of inclusion in global business. The gap between developing and emerging or developing nations is closing in. The traditional view that only developed nations have a significant impact in the economy is waning quite fast. Business flows in all directions and trade is increasing from one developing country to another emerging economy. The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) view globalization from a positive angle as they cite that the phenomenon has heightened competition among everyone, from everywhere, and for everything. Proof that the most recent changes in the universal competitive backdrop will have seismic magnitudes is already clear. Consider, for instance, the rising number of organizations from developing nations that are finding their way in the Fortune 500 ratings of the world’s largest companies. The number of businesses or ventures from emerging economies in the rankings stands at 62, and most of them are from the BRIC nations. Still, the number of firms from developing nations being considered by the ubiquitous scale continues to increase. What is more, given that the current trend may continue, emerging countries and economies will attribute to one-third of the companies in the Fortune 500 list within a decade. Disadvantages Inequitable Business Growth Opponents to globalization argue that, even though developing nations are increasingly being recognized because of their wealth, the gap between the poor and the rich is growing. Opponents are not slow to support that the initial wave of globalization led to unprecedented prosperity. However, they argue that the deal has never been fair to poor countries and the poor. The poor people living in developing nations have not benefited as much from globalization as compared to the rich in developed nations. To opponents, the narrowing of the gap between the rich and the poor has only happened to rich countries and globalizers. Countries that have been active in the process of globalization such as Japan and Argentina have managed to raise their GDP and general status. However, not all nations take part in this process. Detractors point out that not every nation is a globalized or has been able to take full advantage of the process of globalization. During the first wave of globalization, they say, nations such as China and India took a negative turn and performed poorly. Rising inequality of income between nations during the first wave of globalization was clear in some nations (Mishkin 4). According to Robbins and Ferris (74), critics also claim that globalization has led to reducing payments to employees as well as exploitation of the poor. Globalizers and rich countries, according to the authors, are advancing at the expense of poor countries and workers in general. Their premise is that globalization is making employees from richer countries redundant by making employment opportunities to workers from developing nations. Critics add that globalizers are doing this to increase profit for themselves and shareholders forgetting that wages are going down while oppression is increasing among workers. For instance, child labor exploits young and underage workers while sweatshops expose workers to poor working conditions while offering them meager pay. Consequently, firms and entrepreneurs that use child labor and sweatshops make millions from continued effects of globalization (Robbins and Ferris 74). Data from the World Bank and studies from Harvard also support the premise that globalization is negative as it hurts the poor. Critics behind this premise state that globalization is a progression by which rich nations and the rich increase their wealth while developing nations and the poor become poorer. Reports by the World Bank reveal that the disproportions of income between the rich and the destitute have been rising instead of going down over the past ages of globalization. From 1988 t0 1993, the richest people had their incomes increased by 12% while the wages of the poor went down by 25%. Further, the World Bank reports that the number of people surviving with as little as $1 per day is increasing. In conclusion, the World Bank report suggests that the middle class earners and people in the society are slowly disappearing as the gap between the rich and the poor continues to widen (Robbins and Ferris 75). Against such data and backdrop, one may easily be swayed to believe that globalization is causing more harm than good and that the rich are making it in the up the ladder at the expense of the poor. Environmental and Social Injustices Critics of globalization come out strongly stating that the phenomenon has caused various harms to the environment. Faber suggests that the age of globalization is credited for market liberalization, deregulation, privatization, and the negative effect on environmental protection and social welfare. The author says that the rate at which globalization is causing harm to the environment is unprecedented. Industrialized nations encourage poor or developing nations to join them in globalization, and in doing so, the developing nations end up overexploiting their natural resources. It is not the developing nations that benefit the most, but the developed ones. The plundering of the developing nations’ resources and the export of environmental hazards and pollution by the West are altogether accounting for unparalleled environmental issues of global proportions (171 – 173). Discussion Supporters and opponents of globalization all supported arguments regarding globalization and its positive or negative effects. Supporters, though, provide information, arguments, and evidence that are easily discernible and acceptable by many. I support globalization and think that its positive impacts outweigh the negative effects. For example, it is unimaginable how thing would run without global connectivity. Looking at globalization from that angle shows that both critics and supporters benefit. Both supporters and opponents enjoy the convenience that globalization has brought about, and, in fact, no one can do without things such as mobile phones, nice vehicles and many other products and services that are made available by the global supply chain. Supporting globalization also seems to be the nobler thing to do than opposing it, since nothing good comes without a few tribulations here and there. It has been shown that the gap between the rich and the poor has been continually increasing. However, a keen synthesis of the literature that carries these suppositions shows that the gap is only increasing between globalizers and non-globalizers. Countries that have not embraced globalization fully appear to be disadvantaged, and employment in such countries appears to be rising by the day. Further, connecting globalization and child labor or exploitation is inaccurate, as there are many factors that are involved in the illegal trade and practice. Still, globalization efforts through inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations are working hard to ensure that laws and regulations are followed internationally. Conclusion A brief overview of globalization has elucidated many things about it; some positive, some negative. All through the arguments from proponents and opponents of globalization show that the phenomenon is here to stay. It is also evident that, whether for or against globalization, all people benefit from the impacts that globalization has caused. Overall, the arguments supporting globalization appear to outweigh those that are against globalization. Nonetheless, supporters do not deny that globalization has a few negative impacts. Negative impacts are bound to prevail in any system, regardless of how robust and efficient it is. Concerns such as growing gap between the rich and the poor can be mitigated if poor countries embrace globalization. Environmental issues emanating from globalization practices can still be averted through inter-governmental agencies, which have sprout because of globalization. The most important thing, it appears, is to work towards the diffusion of the globalization. Developing measures to counter the negative effects of globalization will also cause many opponents to change their stand. Works Cited Faber, Daniel. Capitalizing on Environmental Injustice: The Polluter-Industrial Complex in the Age of Globalization. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Print. Kluyver, Cornelis de. Fundamentals of Global Strategy: A Business Model Approach. Business Expert Press, 2010. Print. Mishkin, Frederic S. The Next Great Globalization: How Disadvantaged Nations Can Harness Their Financial Systems to Get Rich. Princeton University Press, 2009. Print. Norberg, Johan. In Defence of Global Capitalism. Academic Foundation, 2005. Print. Robbins, P., and R. S. B. Ferris. The Impact of Globalization on the Agricultural Sectors of East and Central African Countries. IITA, 2003. Print. Shallcross, Tony, and John Robinson. Global Citizenship and Environmental Justice. Rodopi, 2006. Print. Sperling, Valerie. Altered States: The Globalization of Accountability. Cambridge University Press, 2009. Print. Swinnen, Johan F. M. Global Supply Chains, Standards and the Poor: How the Globalization of Food Systems and Standards Affects Rural Development and Poverty. CABI, 2007. Print. Read More