Recent from talks
Contribute something
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Globalization
View on Wikipedia
Globalization is the process of increasing interdependence and integration among the economies, markets, societies, and cultures of different countries worldwide. This is made possible by the reduction of barriers to international trade, the liberalization of capital movements, the development of transportation, and the advancement of information and communication technologies.[1] The term globalization first appeared in the early 20th century (supplanting an earlier French term mondialisation). It developed its current meaning sometime in the second half of the 20th century, and came into popular use in the 1990s to describe the unprecedented international connectivity of the post–Cold War world.[2] The origins of globalization can be traced back to the 18th and 19th centuries, driven by advances in transportation and communication technologies. These developments increased global interactions, fostering the growth of international trade and the exchange of ideas, beliefs, and cultures. While globalization is primarily an economic process of interaction and integration, it is also closely linked to social and cultural dynamics. Additionally, disputes and international diplomacy have played significant roles in the history and evolution of globalization, continuing to shape its modern form. Though many scholars place the origins of globalization in modern times, others trace its history to long before the European Age of Discovery and voyages to the New World, and some even to the third millennium BCE.[3] Large-scale globalization began in the 1820s, and in the late 19th century and early 20th century drove a rapid expansion in the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures.[4] The term global city was subsequently popularized by sociologist Saskia Sassen in her work The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo (1991).[5]
Globalization describes the growing interdependence of the world's economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross-border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information. Countries have built economic partnerships to facilitate these movements over many centuries.
Economically, globalization involves goods, services, data, technology, and the economic resources of capital.[6] The expansion of global markets liberalizes the economic activities of the exchange of goods and funds. Removal of cross-border trade barriers has made the formation of global markets more feasible.[7] Advances in transportation, like the steam locomotive, steamship, jet engine, and container ships, and developments in telecommunication infrastructure such as the telegraph, the Internet, mobile phones, and smartphones, have been major factors in globalization and have generated further interdependence of economic and cultural activities around the globe.[8][9][10]
Between 1990 and 2010, globalization progressed rapidly, driven by the information and communication technology revolution that lowered communication costs, along with trade liberalization and the shift of manufacturing operations to emerging economies (particularly China).[11][12][13] In 2000, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identified four basic aspects of globalization: trade and transactions, capital and investment movements, migration and movement of people, and the dissemination of knowledge.[14] Globalizing processes affect and are affected by business and work organization, economics, sociocultural resources, and the natural environment. Academic literature commonly divides globalization into three major areas: economic globalization, cultural globalization, and political globalization.[15]
Proponents of globalization point to economic growth and broader societal development as benefits, while opponents claim globalizing processes are detrimental to social well-being due to ethnocentrism, environmental consequences, and other potential drawbacks.[16][17]
Globalization, characterized by the increased flow of goods, services, capital, people, and ideas across borders, leads to greater global interdependence by integrating national economies, societies, and cultures. This process, intensified since the 1980s by technological advancements and reduced trade barriers, has profound effects on businesses, cultures, politics, and living standards worldwide.
| Part of a series on |
| Sociology |
|---|
Etymology and usage
[edit]The word globalization was used in the English language as early as the 1930s, but only ever in the context of education, and the term failed to gain traction. Over the next few decades, the term was occasionally used by other scholars and media, but it was not clearly defined.[2] One of the first uses of a term resembling the more common meaning and usage of the modern word was by French economist François Perroux in his essays from the early 1960s (in his French works he used the similar yet distinct term mondialisation, translated as mundialization).[2] Theodore Levitt is sometimes inaccurately cited as having invented the term in the mid-1980s, although he can more confidently be credited with popularizing the term and bringing it into the mainstream business audience during that time.[2]
Though often treated as synonyms, in French, globalization is seen as a stage following mondialisation, a stage that implies the dissolution of national identities and the abolishment of borders inside the world network of economic exchanges.[18]
Since its inception, the concept of globalization has inspired competing definitions and interpretations. Its antecedents date back to the great movements of trade and empire across Asia and the Indian Ocean from the 15th century onward.[19][20]
In 1848, Karl Marx noticed the increasing level of national interdependence brought on by capitalism, and predicted the universal character of the modern world society. He states:
The bourgeoisie has through its exploitation of the world market given a cosmopolitan character to production and consumption in every country. To the great chagrin of Reactionists, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed. . . . In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal inter-dependence of nations.[21]
Sociologists Martin Albrow and Elizabeth King define globalization as "all those processes by which the people of the world are incorporated into a single world society."[6] In The Consequences of Modernity, Anthony Giddens writes: "Globalization can thus be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa."[22] In 1992, Roland Robertson, professor of sociology at the University of Aberdeen and an early writer in the field, described globalization as "the compression of the world and the intensification of the consciousness of the world as a whole."[23]
In Global Transformations, David Held and his co-writers state:
Although in its simplistic sense globalization refers to the widening, deepening and speeding up of global interconnection, such a definition begs further elaboration. ... Globalization can be on a continuum with the local, national and regional. At one end of the continuum lie social and economic relations and networks which are organized on a local and/or national basis; at the other end lie social and economic relations and networks which crystallize on the wider scale of regional and global interactions. Globalization can refer to those spatial-temporal processes of change which underpin a transformation in the organization of human affairs by linking together and expanding human activity across regions and continents. Without reference to such expansive spatial connections, there can be no clear or coherent formulation of this term. ... A satisfactory definition of globalization must capture each of these elements: extensity (stretching), intensity, velocity and impact.[24]
Held and his co-writers' definition of globalization in that same book as "transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions—assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact—generating transcontinental or inter-regional flows" was called "probably the most widely-cited definition" in the 2014 DHL Global Connectiveness Index.[25]
Swedish journalist Thomas Larsson, in his book The Race to the Top: The Real Story of Globalization, states that globalization:
...is the process of world shrinkage, of distances getting shorter, things moving closer. It pertains to the increasing ease with which somebody on one side of the world can interact, to mutual benefit, with somebody on the other side of the world.[26]
Paul James defines globalization with a more direct and historically contextualized emphasis:
Globalization is the extension of social relations across world-space, defining that world-space in terms of the historically variable ways that it has been practiced and socially understood through changing world-time.[27]
Manfred Steger, professor of global studies and research leader in the Global Cities Institute at RMIT University, identifies four main empirical dimensions of globalization: economic, political, cultural, and ecological. A fifth dimension—the ideological—cutting across the other four. The ideological dimension, according to Steger, is filled with a range of norms, claims, beliefs, and narratives about the phenomenon itself.[28]
James and Steger stated that the concept of globalization "emerged from the intersection of four interrelated sets of 'communities of practice' (Wenger, 1998): academics, journalists, publishers/editors, and librarians."[2]: 424 They note the term was used "in education to describe the global life of the mind"; in international relations to describe the extension of the European Common Market, and in journalism to describe how the "American Negro and his problem are taking on a global significance".[2] They have also argued that four forms of globalization can be distinguished that complement and cut across the solely empirical dimensions.[27][29] According to James, the oldest dominant form of globalization is embodied globalization, the movement of people. A second form is agency-extended globalization, the circulation of agents of different institutions, organizations, and polities, including imperial agents. Object-extended globalization, a third form, is the movement of commodities and other objects of exchange. He calls the transmission of ideas, images, knowledge, and information across world-space disembodied globalization, maintaining that it is currently the dominant form of globalization. James holds that this series of distinctions allows for an understanding of how, today, the most embodied forms of globalization such as the movement of refugees and migrants are increasingly restricted, while the most disembodied forms such as the circulation of financial instruments and codes are the most deregulated.[30]
The journalist Thomas L. Friedman popularized the term "flat world", arguing that globalized trade, outsourcing, supply-chaining, and political forces had permanently changed the world, for better and worse. He asserted that the pace of globalization was quickening and that its impact on business organization and practice would continue to grow.[31]
Economist Takis Fotopoulos defined "economic globalization" as the opening and deregulation of commodity, capital, and labor markets that led toward present neoliberal globalization. He used "political globalization" to refer to the emergence of a transnational élite and a phasing out of the nation-state. Meanwhile, he used "cultural globalization" to reference the worldwide homogenization of culture. Other of his usages included "ideological globalization", "technological globalization", and "social globalization".[32]
Lechner and Boli (2012) define globalization as more people across large distances becoming connected in more and different ways.[33]
"Globophobia" is used to refer to the fear of globalization, though it can also mean the fear of balloons.[34][35][36]
History
[edit]There are both distal and proximate causes which can be traced in the historical factors affecting globalization. Large-scale globalization began in the 19th century.[37]
Archaic
[edit]
The phrase "Archaic globalization" conventionally refers to a phase in the history of globalization including globalizing events and developments from the time of the earliest civilizations until roughly the 1600s CE. This term covers the relationships between communities and states and how they developed through the geographical spread of ideas and social norms at both local and regional levels.[38][need quotation to verify]
In this schema, three main prerequisites are posited for globalization to occur:
- The first is the idea of Eastern Origins, which shows how Western states have adapted and implemented learned principles from the East.[38] Without the spread of traditional ideas from the East, Western globalization would not have emerged in the way that it did.
- The interactions of early states were not on a global scale and most often were confined to local regions: Asia, North Africa, the Middle East, and certain parts of Europe.[38] With early globalization, it was difficult for states to interact with others that were not close. Eventually, technological advances allowed states to learn of others' existence and thus another phase of globalization could occur.
- The third prerequisite has to do with inter-dependency, stability, and regularity. If a state is not dependent on another, then there is no way for either state to be mutually affected by the other. This is one of the driving forces behind global connections and trade; without either, globalization would not have emerged the way it did and states would still be dependent on their own production and resources to work. This is one of the arguments surrounding the idea of early globalization. It is argued that archaic globalization did not function in a similar manner to modern globalization because states were not as interdependent on other states (as they are today).[38]
Also posited is a "multi-polar" nature to archaic globalization, which involved the active participation of non-Europeans. Because it predated the Great Divergence in the nineteenth century, where Western Europe pulled ahead of the rest of the world in terms of industrial production and economic output, archaic globalization was a phenomenon that was driven not only by Europe but also by other economically developed Old World centers such as Gujarat, Bengal, coastal China, and Japan.[39]

The German historical economist and sociologist Andre Gunder Frank argues that a form of globalization began with the rise of trade links between Sumer and the Indus Valley civilization in the third millennium BCE. This archaic globalization continued during the Hellenistic Age, when commercialized urban centers enveloped the axis of Greek culture that reached from India to Spain, including Alexandria and the other Alexandrine cities. Early on, the geographic position of Greece, Greek demographics and the necessity of importing wheat encouraged Greek city-states to found outpost colonies[40] and to engage in maritime trade.[41] Trade in ancient Greece was largely unrestricted: the state controlled only the supply of grain.[3] Greek style, culture and art spread in a "form of Mediterranean globalization".[42]

Trade on the Silk Road became a significant factor in the development of civilizations from China to the Indian subcontinent, Persia, Europe, and Arabia, opening long-distance political and economic interactions between them.[43] Though silk was certainly the major trade-item from China, common goods such as salt and sugar were traded as well; and religions, syncretic philosophies, and various technologies, as well as diseases, also traveled along the Silk Routes. In addition to economic trade, the Silk Road served as a means of carrying out cultural trade among the civilizations along its network.[44] The movement of people, such as refugees, artists, craftsmen, missionaries, robbers, and envoys, resulted in the exchange of religions, art, languages, and new technologies.[45] From around 3000 BCE to 1000 CE, connectivity within Afro-Eurasia was centered upon the Indo-Mediterranean region, with the Silk Road later rising in importance with the Mongol Empire's consolidation of Asia in the 13th century CE.[46][47]
Early modern
[edit]"Early modern" or "proto-globalization" covers a period of the history of globalization roughly spanning the years between 1600 and 1800. The concept of "proto-globalization" was first introduced by historians A. G. Hopkins and Christopher Bayly. The term describes the phase of increasing trade links and cultural exchange that characterized the period immediately preceding the advent of high "modern globalization" in the late 19th century.[48] This phase of globalization was characterized by the rise of maritime European empires, in the 15th and 17th centuries, first the Portuguese Empire (1415) followed by the Spanish Empire (1492), and later the Dutch and British Empires. In the 17th century, world trade developed further when chartered companies like the British East India Company (founded in 1600) and the Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602, often described as the first multinational corporation in which stock was offered) were established.[49]

An alternative view from historians Dennis Flynn and Arturo Giraldez, postulated that: globalization began with the first circumnavigation of the globe under the Magellan-Elcano expedition which preluded the rise of global silver trade.[50][51]
Early modern globalization is distinguished from modern globalization on the basis of expansionism, the method of managing global trade, and the level of information exchange. The period is marked by the shift of hegemony to Western Europe, the rise of larger-scale conflicts between powerful nations such as the Thirty Years' War, and demand for commodities, most particularly slaves. The triangular trade made it possible for Europe to take advantage of resources within the Western Hemisphere. The transfer of animal stocks, plant crops, and epidemic diseases associated with Alfred W. Crosby's concept of the Columbian exchange also played a central role in this process. European, Middle Eastern, Indian, Southeast Asian, and Chinese merchants were all involved in early modern trade and communications, particularly in the Indian Ocean region.


Modern
[edit]According to economic historians Kevin H. O'Rourke, Leandro Prados de la Escosura, and Guillaume Daudin, several factors promoted globalization in the period 1815–1870:[52]
- The conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars brought in an era of relative peace in Europe.
- Innovations in transportation technology reduced trade costs substantially.
- New industrial military technologies increased the power of European states and the United States, and allowed these powers to forcibly open up markets across the world and extend their empires.
- A gradual move towards greater liberalization in European countries.
During the 19th century, globalization approached its form as a direct result of the Industrial Revolution. Industrialization allowed standardized production of household items using economies of scale while rapid population growth created sustained demand for commodities. In the 19th century, steamships reduced the cost of international transportation significantly and railroads made inland transportation cheaper. The transportation revolution occurred some time between 1820 and 1850.[37] More nations embraced international trade.[37] Globalization in this period was decisively shaped by nineteenth-century imperialism such as in Africa and Asia.[53][54]
Contemporary
[edit]After World War II, work by politicians led to the agreements of the Bretton Woods Conference, in which major governments laid down the framework for international monetary policy, commerce, and finance, and the founding of several international institutions intended to facilitate economic growth by lowering trade barriers. Initially, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) led to a series of agreements to remove trade restrictions. GATT's successor was the World Trade Organization (WTO), which provided a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements and a dispute resolution process. Exports nearly doubled from 8.5% of total gross world product in 1970 to 16.2% in 2001.[55] The approach of using global agreements to advance trade stumbled with the failure of the Doha Development Round of trade negotiation. Many countries then shifted to bilateral or smaller multilateral agreements, such as the 2011 United States–Korea Free Trade Agreement.
The invention of shipping containers in 1956 helped advance the globalization of commerce.[53][54] Since the 1970s, aviation has become increasingly affordable to middle classes in developed countries. Open skies policies and low-cost carriers have helped to bring competition to the market. In the 1990s, the growth of low-cost communication networks cut the cost of communicating between countries. More work can be performed using a computer without regard to location. This included accounting, software development, and engineering design.
Student exchange programs became popular after World War II, and are intended to increase the participants' understanding and tolerance of other cultures, as well as improving their language skills and broadening their social horizons. Between 1963 and 2006, the number of students studying in a foreign country increased 9 times.[56]

Since the 1980s, modern globalization has spread rapidly through the expansion of capitalism and neoliberal ideologies.[57] The implementation of neoliberal policies has allowed for the privatization of public industry, deregulation of laws or policies that interfered with the free flow of the market, as well as cut-backs to governmental social services.[58] These neoliberal policies were introduced to many developing countries in the form of structural adjustment programs (SAPs) that were implemented by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).[57] These programs required that the country receiving monetary aid would open its markets to capitalism, privatize public industry, allow free trade, cut social services like healthcare and education and allow the free movement of giant multinational corporations.[59] These programs allowed the World Bank and the IMF to become global financial market regulators that would promote neoliberalism and the creation of free markets for multinational corporations on a global scale.[60]

In the late 19th and early 20th century, the connectedness of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. This slowed down from the 1910s onward due to the World Wars and the Cold War,[61] but picked up again in the 1980s and 1990s.[62] The revolutions of 1989 and subsequent liberalization in many parts of the world resulted in a significant expansion of global interconnectedness. The migration and movement of people can also be highlighted as a prominent feature of the globalization process. In the period between 1965 and 1990, the proportion of the labor force migrating approximately doubled. Most migration occurred between the developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs).[63] As economic integration intensified workers moved to areas with higher wages and most of the developing world oriented toward the international market economy. The collapse of the Soviet Union not only ended the Cold War's division of the world – it also left the United States its sole policeman and an unfettered advocate of free market.[according to whom?] It also resulted in the growing prominence of attention focused on the movement of diseases, the proliferation of popular culture and consumer values, the growing prominence of international institutions like the UN, and concerted international action on such issues as the environment and human rights.[64] Other developments as dramatic were the Internet's becoming influential in connecting people across the world; As of June 2012[update], more than 2.4 billion people—over a third of the world's human population—have used the services of the Internet.[65][66] Growth of globalization has never been smooth. One influential event was the late 2000s recession, which was associated with lower growth (in areas such as cross-border phone calls and Skype usage) or even temporarily negative growth (in areas such as trade) of global interconnectedness.[67][68]
The China–United States trade war, starting in 2018, negatively affected trade between the two largest national economies. The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic included a massive decline in tourism and international business travel as many countries temporarily closed borders. The 2021–2022 global supply chain crisis resulted from temporary shutdowns of manufacturing and transportation facilities, and labor shortages. Supply problems incentivized some switches to domestic production.[69] The economic impact of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine included a blockade of Ukrainian ports and international sanctions on Russia, resulting in some de-coupling of the Russian economy with global trade, especially with the European Union and other Western countries.
Modern consensus for the last 15 years regards globalization as having run its course and gone into decline.[70] A common argument for this is that trade has dropped since its peak in 2008, and never recovered since the Great Recession. New opposing views from some economists have argued such trends are a result of price drops and in actuality, trade volume is increasing, especially with agricultural products, natural resources and refined petroleum.[71][72] The 21st century melting of the Arctic will also affect global trade, as it is paving the way for shorter trade routes.[73]
Economic globalization
[edit]

Economic globalization is the increasing economic interdependence of national economies across the world through a rapid increase in cross-border movement of goods, services, technology, and capital.[75] Whereas the globalization of business is centered around the diminution of international trade regulations as well as tariffs, taxes, and other impediments that suppresses global trade, economic globalization is the process of increasing economic integration between countries, leading to the emergence of a global marketplace or a single world market.[76] Depending on the paradigm, economic globalization can be viewed as either a positive or a negative phenomenon. Economic globalization comprises: globalization of production; which refers to the obtainment of goods and services from a particular source from locations around the globe to benefit from difference in cost and quality. Likewise, it also comprises globalization of markets; which is defined as the union of different and separate markets into a massive global marketplace. Economic globalization also includes[77] competition, technology, and corporations and industries.[75]
Current globalization trends can be largely accounted for by developed economies integrating with less developed economies by means of foreign direct investment, the reduction of trade barriers as well as other economic reforms, and, in many cases, immigration.[78]

International standards have made trade in goods and services more efficient. An example of such standard is the intermodal container. Containerization dramatically reduced the costs of transportation, supported the post-war boom in international trade, and was a major element in globalization.[53] International standards are set by the International Organization for Standardization, which is composed of representatives from various national standards organizations.
A multinational corporation, or worldwide enterprise,[79] is an organization that owns or controls the production of goods or services in one or more countries other than their home country.[80] It can also be referred to as an international corporation, a transnational corporation, or a stateless corporation.[81]
A free-trade area is the region encompassing a trade bloc whose member countries have signed a free-trade agreement (FTA). Such agreements involve cooperation between at least two countries to reduce trade barriers – import quotas and tariffs – and to increase trade of goods and services with each other.[82]
If people are also free to move between the countries, in addition to a free-trade agreement, it would also be considered an open border. Arguably, the most significant free-trade area in the world is the European Union, a politico-economic union of 27 member states that are primarily located in Europe. The EU has developed European Single Market through a standardized system of laws that apply in all member states. EU policies aim to ensure the free movement of people, goods, services, and capital within the internal market,[83]
Trade facilitation looks at how procedures and controls governing the movement of goods across national borders can be improved to reduce associated cost burdens and maximize efficiency while safeguarding legitimate regulatory objectives.
Global trade in services is also significant. For example, in India, business process outsourcing has been described as the "primary engine of the country's development over the next few decades, contributing broadly to GDP growth, employment growth, and poverty alleviation".[84][85]
William I. Robinson's theoretical approach to globalization is a critique of Wallerstein's World Systems Theory. He believes that the global capital experienced today is due to a new and distinct form of globalization which began in the 1980s. Robinson argues not only are economic activities expanded across national boundaries but also there is a transnational fragmentation of these activities.[86] One important aspect of Robinson's globalization theory is that production of goods are increasingly global. This means that one pair of shoes can be produced by six countries, each contributing to a part of the production process.
Cultural globalization
[edit]
Cultural globalization refers to the transmission of ideas, meanings, and values around the world in such a way as to extend and intensify social relations.[87] This process is marked by the common consumption of cultures that have been diffused by the Internet, popular culture media, and international travel. This has added to processes of commodity exchange and colonization which have a longer history of carrying cultural meaning around the globe. The circulation of cultures enables individuals to partake in extended social relations that cross national and regional borders. The creation and expansion of such social relations is not merely observed on a material level. Cultural globalization involves the formation of shared norms and knowledge with which people associate their individual and collective cultural identities. It brings increasing interconnectedness among different populations and cultures.[88]
Cross-cultural communication is a field of study that looks at how people from differing cultural backgrounds communicate, in similar and different ways among themselves, and how they endeavor to communicate across cultures. Intercultural communication is a related field of study.
Cultural diffusion is the spread of cultural items—such as ideas, styles, religions, technologies, languages etc. Cultural globalization has increased cross-cultural contacts, but may be accompanied by a decrease in the uniqueness of once-isolated communities. For example, sushi is available in Germany as well as Japan, but Euro-Disney outdraws the city of Paris, potentially reducing demand for "authentic" French pastry.[89][90][91] Globalization's contribution to the alienation of individuals from their traditions may be modest compared to the impact of modernity itself, as alleged by existentialists such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. Globalization has expanded recreational opportunities by spreading pop culture, particularly via the Internet and satellite television. The cultural diffusion can create a homogenizing force, where globalization is seen as synonymous with homogenizing force via connectedness of markets, cultures, politics and the desire for modernizations through imperial countries sphere of influence.[92]
Religions were among the earliest cultural elements to globalize, being spread by force, migration, evangelists, imperialists, and traders. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and more recently sects such as Mormonism are among those religions which have taken root and influenced endemic cultures in places far from their origins.[93]
Globalization has strongly influenced sports.[94] For example, the modern Olympic Games has athletes from more than 200 nations participating in a variety of competitions.[95] The FIFA World Cup is the most widely viewed and followed sporting event in the world, exceeding even the Olympic Games; a ninth of the entire population of the planet watched the 2006 FIFA World Cup Final.[96][97][98]
The term globalization implies transformation. Cultural practices including traditional music can be lost or turned into a fusion of traditions. Globalization can trigger a state of emergency for the preservation of musical heritage. Archivists may attempt to collect, record, or transcribe repertoires before melodies are assimilated or modified, while local musicians may struggle for authenticity and to preserve local musical traditions. Globalization can lead performers to discard traditional instruments. Fusion genres can become interesting fields of analysis.[99]
Music has an important role in economic and cultural development during globalization. Music genres such as jazz and reggae began locally and later became international phenomena. Globalization gave support to the world music phenomenon by allowing music from developing countries to reach broader audiences.[100] Though the term "World Music" was originally intended for ethnic-specific music, globalization is now expanding its scope such that the term often includes hybrid subgenres such as "world fusion", "global fusion", "ethnic fusion",[101] and worldbeat.[102][103]

Bourdieu claimed that the perception of consumption can be seen as self-identification and the formation of identity. Musically, this translates into each individual having their own musical identity based on likes and tastes. These likes and tastes are greatly influenced by culture, as this is the most basic cause for a person's wants and behavior. The concept of one's own culture is now in a period of change due to globalization. Also, globalization has increased the interdependency of political, personal, cultural, and economic factors.[105]
A 2005 UNESCO report[106] showed that cultural exchange is becoming more frequent from Eastern Asia, but that Western countries are still the main exporters of cultural goods. In 2002, China was the third largest exporter of cultural goods, after the UK and US. Between 1994 and 2002, both North America's and the European Union's shares of cultural exports declined while Asia's cultural exports grew to surpass North America. Related factors are the fact that Asia's population and area are several times that of North America. Americanization is related to a period of high political American clout and of significant growth of America's shops, markets and objects being brought into other countries.
Some critics of globalization argue that it harms the diversity of cultures. As a dominating country's culture is introduced into a receiving country through globalization, it can become a threat to the diversity of local culture. Some argue that globalization may ultimately lead to Westernization or Americanization of culture, where the dominating cultural concepts of economically and politically powerful Western countries spread and cause harm to local cultures.[107]
Globalization is a diverse phenomenon that relates to a multilateral political world and to the increase of cultural objects and markets between countries. The Indian experience particularly reveals the plurality of the impact of cultural globalization.[108]
Transculturalism is defined as "seeing oneself in the other".[109] Transcultural[110] is in turn described as "extending through all human cultures"[110] or "involving, encompassing, or combining elements of more than one culture".[111] Children brought up in transcultural backgrounds are sometimes called third-culture kids.
Political globalization
[edit]
Political globalization refers to the growth of the worldwide political system, both in size and complexity. That system includes national governments, their governmental and intergovernmental organizations as well as government-independent elements of global civil society such as international non-governmental organizations and social movement organizations. One of the key aspects of the political globalization is the declining importance of the nation-state and the rise of other actors on the political scene. William R. Thompson has defined it as "the expansion of a global political system, and its institutions, in which inter-regional transactions (including, but certainly not limited to trade) are managed".[112] Political globalization is one of the three main dimensions of globalization commonly found in academic literature, with the two other being economic globalization and cultural globalization.[15]
Intergovernmentalism is a term in political science with two meanings. The first refers to a theory of regional integration originally proposed by Stanley Hoffmann; the second treats states and the national government as the primary factors for integration. Multi-level governance is an approach in political science and public administration theory that originated from studies on European integration. Multi-level governance gives expression to the idea that there are many interacting authority structures at work in the emergent global political economy. It illuminates the intimate entanglement between the domestic and international levels of authority.
Some people are citizens of multiple nation-states. Multiple citizenship, also called dual citizenship or multiple nationality or dual nationality, is a person's citizenship status, in which a person is concurrently regarded as a citizen of more than one state under the laws of those states.

Increasingly, non-governmental organizations influence public policy across national boundaries, including humanitarian aid and developmental efforts.[114] Philanthropic organizations with global missions are also coming to the forefront of humanitarian efforts; charities such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Accion International, the Acumen Fund (now Acumen) and the Echoing Green have combined the business model with philanthropy, giving rise to business organizations such as the Global Philanthropy Group and new associations of philanthropists such as the Global Philanthropy Forum. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation projects include a current multibillion-dollar commitment to funding immunizations in some of the world's more impoverished but rapidly growing countries.[115] The Hudson Institute estimates total private philanthropic flows to developing countries at US$59 billion in 2010.[116]
As a response to globalization, some countries have embraced isolationist policies. For example, the North Korean government makes it very difficult for foreigners to enter the country and strictly monitors their activities when they do. Aid workers are subject to considerable scrutiny and excluded from places and regions the government does not wish them to enter. Citizens cannot freely leave the country.[117][118]
Globalization and gender
[edit]
Globalization has been a gendered process where giant multinational corporations have outsourced jobs to low-wage, low skilled, quota free economies like the ready made garment industry in Bangladesh where poor women make up the majority of labor force. Despite a large proportion of women workers in the garment industry, women are still heavily underemployed compared to men. Most women that are employed in the garment industry come from the countryside of Bangladesh triggering migration of women in search of garment work. It is still unclear as to whether or not access to paid work for women where it did not exist before has empowered them. The answers varied depending on whether it is the employers perspective or the workers and how they view their choices. Women workers did not see the garment industry as economically sustainable for them in the long run due to long hours standing and poor working conditions. Although women workers did show significant autonomy over their personal lives including their ability to negotiate with family, more choice in marriage, and being valued as a wage earner in the family. This did not translate into workers being able to collectively organize themselves in order to negotiate a better deal for themselves at work.[119]
Another example of outsourcing in manufacturing includes the maquiladora industry in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico where poor women make up the majority of the labor force. Women in the maquiladora industry have produced high levels of turnover not staying long enough to be trained compared to men. A gendered two tiered system within the maquiladora industry has been created that focuses on training and worker loyalty. Women are seen as being untrainable, placed in un-skilled, low wage jobs, while men are seen as more trainable with less turnover rates, and placed in more high skilled technical jobs. The idea of training has become a tool used against women to blame them for their high turnover rates which also benefit the industry keeping women as temporary workers.[120]
Other dimensions
[edit]Scholars also occasionally discuss other, less common dimensions of globalization, such as environmental globalization (the internationally coordinated practices and regulations, often in the form of international treaties, regarding environmental protection)[121] or military globalization (growth in global extent and scope of security relationships).[122] Those dimensions, however, receive much less attention the three described above, as academic literature commonly subdivides globalization into three major areas: economic globalization, cultural globalization and political globalization.[15]
Movement of people
[edit]
An essential aspect of globalization is movement of people, and state-boundary limits on that movement have changed across history.[123] The movement of tourists and business people opened up over the last century. As transportation technology improved, travel time and costs decreased dramatically between the 18th and early 20th century. For example, travel across the Atlantic Ocean used to take up to 5 weeks in the 18th century, but around the time of the 20th century it took a mere 8 days.[124] Today, modern aviation has made long-distance transportation quick and affordable.
Tourism is travel for pleasure. The developments in technology and transportation infrastructure, such as jumbo jets, low-cost airlines, and more accessible airports have made many types of tourism more affordable. At any given moment half a million people are in the air.[125] International tourist arrivals surpassed the milestone of 1 billion tourists globally for the first time in 2012.[126] A visa is a conditional authorization granted by a country to a foreigner, allowing them to enter and temporarily remain within, or to leave that country. Some countries – such as those in the Schengen Area – have agreements with other countries allowing each other's citizens to travel between them without visas (for example, Switzerland is part of a Schengen Agreement allowing easy travel for people from countries within the European Union). The World Tourism Organization announced that the number of tourists who require a visa before traveling was at its lowest level ever in 2015.[127]
Immigration is the international movement of people into a destination country of which they are not natives or where they do not possess citizenship in order to settle or reside there, especially as permanent residents or naturalized citizens, or to take-up employment as a migrant worker or temporarily as a foreign worker.[128][129][130] According to the International Labour Organization, as of 2014[update] there were an estimated 232 million international migrants in the world (defined as persons outside their country of origin for 12 months or more) and approximately half of them were estimated to be economically active (i.e. being employed or seeking employment).[131] International movement of labor is often seen as important to economic development. For example, freedom of movement for workers in the European Union means that people can move freely between member states to live, work, study or retire in another country.

Globalization is associated with a dramatic rise in international education. The development of global cross-cultural competence in the workforce through ad-hoc training has deserved increasing attention in recent times.[133][134] More and more students are seeking higher education in foreign countries and many international students now consider overseas study a stepping-stone to permanent residency within a country.[135] The contributions that foreign students make to host nation economies, both culturally and financially has encouraged major players to implement further initiatives to facilitate the arrival and integration of overseas students, including substantial amendments to immigration and visa policies and procedures.[56]
A transnational marriage is a marriage between two people from different countries. A variety of special issues arise in marriages between people from different countries, including those related to citizenship and culture, which add complexity and challenges to these kinds of relationships. In an age of increasing globalization, where a growing number of people have ties to networks of people and places across the globe, rather than to a current geographic location, people are increasingly marrying across national boundaries. Transnational marriage is a by-product of the movement and migration of people.
Movement of information
[edit]| Region | 2005 | 2010 | 2017 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Africa | 2% | 10% | 21.8% | 37% |
| Americas | 36% | 49% | 65.9% | 87% |
| Arab States | 8% | 26% | 43.7% | 69% |
| Asia and Pacific | 9% | 23% | 43.9% | 66% |
| Commonwealth of Independent States |
10% | 34% | 67.7% | 89% |
| Europe | 46% | 67% | 79.6% | 91% |

Before electronic communications, long-distance communications relied on mail. Speed of global communications was limited by the maximum speed of courier services (especially horses and ships) until the mid-19th century. The electric telegraph was the first method of instant long-distance communication. For example, before the first transatlantic cable, communications between Europe and the Americas took weeks because ships had to carry mail across the ocean. The first transatlantic cable reduced communication time considerably, allowing a message and a response in the same day. Lasting transatlantic telegraph connections were achieved in the 1865–1866. The first wireless telegraphy transmitters were developed in 1895.
The Internet has been instrumental in connecting people across geographical boundaries. For example, Facebook is a social networking service which has more than 1.65 billion monthly active users as of 31 March 2016[update].[137]
Globalization can be spread by Global journalism which provides massive information and relies on the internet to interact, "makes it into an everyday routine to investigate how people and their actions, practices, problems, life conditions, etc. in different parts of the world are interrelated. possible to assume that global threats such as climate change precipitate the further establishment of global journalism."[138]
Globalization and disease
[edit]In the current era of globalization, the world is more interdependent than at any other time. Efficient and inexpensive transportation has left few places inaccessible, and increased global trade has brought more and more people into contact with animal diseases that have subsequently jumped species barriers (see zoonosis).[139]
Coronavirus disease 2019, abbreviated COVID-19, first appeared in Wuhan, China in November 2019. More than 180 countries have reported cases since then.[140] As of April 6, 2020[update], the U.S. has the most confirmed active cases in the world.[141] More than 3.4 million people from the worst-affected countries entered the U.S. in the first three months since the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic.[142] This has caused a detrimental impact on the global economy, particularly for SME's and Microbusinesses with unlimited liability/self-employed, leaving them vulnerable to financial difficulties, increasing the market share for oligopolistic markets as well as increasing the barriers of entry.
Measurement
[edit]One index of globalization is the KOF Index of Globalization, which measures three important dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political.[143] Another is the A.T. Kearney / Foreign Policy Magazine Globalization Index.[144]
|
|
Measurements of economic globalization typically focus on variables such as trade, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), Gross Domestic Product (GDP), portfolio investment, and income. However, newer indices attempt to measure globalization in more general terms, including variables related to political, social, cultural, and even environmental aspects of globalization.[145][146]
The DHL Global Connectedness Index studies four main types of cross-border flow: trade (in both goods and services), information, people (including tourists, students, and migrants), and capital. It shows that the depth of global integration fell by about one-tenth after 2008, but by 2013 had recovered well above its pre-crash peak.[25][67] The report also found a shift of economic activity to emerging economies.[25]
Support and criticism
[edit]
Reactions to processes contributing to globalization have varied widely with a history as long as extraterritorial contact and trade. Philosophical differences regarding the costs and benefits of such processes give rise to a broad-range of ideologies and social movements. Proponents of economic growth, expansion, and development, in general, view globalizing processes as desirable or necessary to the well-being of human society.[147]
Antagonists view one or more globalizing processes as detrimental to social well-being on a global or local scale;[147] this includes those who focus on social or natural sustainability of long-term and continuous economic expansion, the social structural inequality caused by these processes, and the colonial, imperialistic, or hegemonic ethnocentrism, cultural assimilation and cultural appropriation that underlie such processes.
Globalization tends to bring people into contact with foreign people and cultures. Xenophobia is the fear of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.[148][149] Xenophobia can manifest itself in many ways involving the relations and perceptions of an ingroup towards an outgroup, including a fear of losing identity, suspicion of its activities, aggression, and desire to eliminate its presence to secure a presumed purity.[150]
Critiques of globalization generally stem from discussions surrounding the impact of such processes on the planet as well as the human costs. They challenge directly traditional metrics, such as GDP, and look to other measures, such as the Gini coefficient[151] or the Happy Planet Index,[152] and point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequences–social disintegration, a breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"[153] which they claim are the unintended consequences of globalization. Others point out that, while the forces of globalization have led to the spread of western-style democracy, this has been accompanied by an increase in inter-ethnic tension and violence as free market economic policies combine with democratic processes of universal suffrage as well as an escalation in militarization to impose democratic principles and as a means to conflict resolution.[154]
On 9 August 2019, Pope Francis denounced isolationism and hinted that the Catholic Church will embrace globalization at the October 2019 Amazonia Synod, stating "the whole is greater than the parts. Globalization and unity should not be conceived as a sphere, but as a polyhedron: each people retains its identity in unity with others"[155]
Public opinion
[edit]This article needs to be updated. (December 2019) |
As a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, globalization is considered by some as a form of capitalist expansion which entails the integration of local and national economies into a global, underregulated market economy.[156] A 2005 study found a large increase in articles negative towards globalization in the years prior. In 1998, negative articles outpaced positive by two to one.[157] The number of newspaper articles showing negative framing rose from about 10% in 1991 to 55% in 1999. This increase occurred during a period when the number of articles concerning globalization nearly doubled.[157]
International polls have shown that residents of Africa and Asia tend to view globalization more favorably than residents of Europe or North America. In Africa, a Gallup poll found 70% viewed globalization favorably.[158] The BBC found that 50% of people believed that economic globalization was proceeding too rapidly, while 35% believed it was too slow.[159]
In 2004, Philip Gordon stated that "a clear majority of Europeans believe that globalization can enrich their lives, while believing the European Union can help them take advantage of globalization's benefits while shielding them from its negative effects". The main opposition consisted of socialists, environmental groups, and nationalists. Residents of the EU did not appear to feel threatened by globalization in 2004. The EU job market was more stable and workers were less likely to accept wage/benefit cuts. Social spending was much higher than in the US.[160] In a Danish poll in 2007, 76% responded that globalization is a good thing.[161]
A 1993 US survey showed more than 40% of respondents were unfamiliar with the concept of globalization. When the survey was repeated in 1998, 89% had a polarized view of globalization as being either good or bad. Discourse on globalization, which began in the financial community, shifted to a heated debate between proponents and disenchanted students and workers. Polarization increased dramatically after the establishment of the WTO in 1995; this event and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-globalization movement.[157] Initially, college educated workers were likely to support globalization. Less educated workers, who were more likely to compete with immigrants and workers in developing countries, tended to be opponents. The situation changed after the Great Recession. According to a 1997 poll 58% of college graduates said globalization had been good for the US. By 2008 only 33% thought it was good. Respondents with high school education also became more opposed.[162]
According to Takenaka Heizo and Chida Ryokichi, as of 1998[update] there was a perception in Japan that the economy was "Small and Frail". However, Japan was resource-poor and used exports to pay for its raw materials. Anxiety over their position caused terms such as internationalization and globalization to enter everyday language. However, Japanese tradition was to be as self-sufficient as possible, particularly in agriculture.[163]
Many in developing countries see globalization as a positive force that lifts them out of poverty.[164] Those opposing globalization typically combine environmental concerns with nationalism. Opponents consider governments as agents of neo-colonialism that are subservient to multinational corporations.[165] Much of this criticism comes from the middle class; the Brookings Institution suggested this was because the middle class perceived upwardly mobile low-income groups as threatening to their economic security.[166]
Economics
[edit]
The literature analyzing the economics of free trade is extremely rich with extensive work having been done on the theoretical and empirical effects. Though it creates winners and losers, the broad consensus among economists is that free trade is a large and unambiguous net gain for society.[167][168] In a 2006 survey of 83 American economists, "87.5% agree that the U.S. should eliminate remaining tariffs and other barriers to trade" and "90.1% disagree with the suggestion that the U.S. should restrict employers from outsourcing work to foreign countries."[169]
Quoting Harvard economics professor N. Gregory Mankiw, "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards."[170] In a survey of leading economists, none disagreed with the notion that "freer trade improves productive efficiency and offers consumers better choices, and in the long run these gains are much larger than any effects on employment."[171] Most economists would agree that although increasing returns to scale might mean that certain industry could settle in a geographical area without any strong economic reason derived from comparative advantage, this is not a reason to argue against free trade because the absolute level of output enjoyed by both "winner" and "loser" will increase with the "winner" gaining more than the "loser" but both gaining more than before in an absolute level.
In the book The End of Poverty, Jeffrey Sachs discusses how many factors can affect a country's ability to enter the world market, including government corruption; legal and social disparities based on gender, ethnicity, or caste; diseases such as AIDS and malaria; lack of infrastructure (including transportation, communications, health, and trade); unstable political landscapes; protectionism; and geographic barriers.[172] Jagdish Bhagwati, a former adviser to the U.N. on globalization, holds that, although there are obvious problems with overly rapid development, globalization is a very positive force that lifts countries out of poverty by causing a virtuous economic cycle associated with faster economic growth.[164] However, economic growth does not necessarily mean a reduction in poverty; in fact, the two can coexist. Economic growth is conventionally measured using indicators such as GDP and GNI that do not accurately reflect the growing disparities in wealth.[173] Additionally, Oxfam International argues that poor people are often excluded from globalization-induced opportunities "by a lack of productive assets, weak infrastructure, poor education and ill-health;"[174] effectively leaving these marginalized groups in a poverty trap. Economist Paul Krugman is another staunch supporter of globalization and free trade with a record of disagreeing with many critics of globalization. He argues that many of them lack a basic understanding of comparative advantage and its importance in today's world.[175]
The flow of migrants to advanced economies has been claimed to provide a means through which global wages converge. An IMF study noted a potential for skills to be transferred back to developing countries as wages in those a countries rise.[14] Lastly, the dissemination of knowledge has been an integral aspect of globalization. Technological innovations (or technological transfer) are conjectured to benefit most developing and least developing countries (LDCs), as for example in the adoption of mobile phones.[63]
There has been a rapid economic growth in Asia after embracing market orientation-based economic policies that encourage private property rights, free enterprise and competition. In particular, in East Asian developing countries, GDP per head rose at 5.9% a year from 1975 to 2001 (according to 2003 Human Development Report[176] of UNDP). Like this, the British economic journalist Martin Wolf says that incomes of poor developing countries, with more than half the world's population, grew substantially faster than those of the world's richest countries that remained relatively stable in its growth, leading to reduced international inequality and the incidence of poverty.

Certain demographic changes in the developing world after active economic liberalization and international integration resulted in rising general welfare and, hence, reduced inequality. According to Wolf, in the developing world as a whole, life expectancy rose by four months each year after 1970 and infant mortality rate declined from 107 per thousand in 1970 to 58 in 2000 due to improvements in standards of living and health conditions. Also, adult literacy in developing countries rose from 53% in 1970 to 74% in 1998 and much lower illiteracy rate among the young guarantees that rates will continue to fall as time passes. Furthermore, the reduction in fertility rate in the developing world as a whole from 4.1 births per woman in 1980 to 2.8 in 2000 indicates improved education level of women on fertility, and control of fewer children with more parental attention and investment.[178] Consequently, more prosperous and educated parents with fewer children have chosen to withdraw their children from the labor force to give them opportunities to be educated at school improving the issue of child labor. Thus, despite seemingly unequal distribution of income within these developing countries, their economic growth and development have brought about improved standards of living and welfare for the population as a whole.
Per capita gross domestic product (GDP) growth among post-1980 globalizing countries accelerated from 1.4 percent a year in the 1960s and 2.9 percent a year in the 1970s to 3.5 percent in the 1980s and 5.0 percent in the 1990s. This acceleration in growth seems even more remarkable given that the rich countries saw steady declines in growth from a high of 4.7 percent in the 1960s to 2.2 percent in the 1990s. Also, the non-globalizing developing countries seem to fare worse than the globalizers, with the former's annual growth rates falling from highs of 3.3 percent during the 1970s to only 1.4 percent during the 1990s. This rapid growth among the globalizers is not simply due to the strong performances of China and India in the 1980s and 1990s—18 out of the 24 globalizers experienced increases in growth, many of them quite substantial.[179]

The globalization of the late 20th and early 21st centuries has led to the resurfacing of the idea that the growth of economic interdependence promotes peace.[180] This idea had been very powerful during the globalization of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and was a central doctrine of classical liberals of that era, such as the young John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946).[181]
Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as a promotion of corporate interests.[182] They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of corporate entities shapes the political policy of countries.[183][184] They advocate global institutions and policies that they believe better address the moral claims of poor and working classes as well as environmental concerns.[185] Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.[186]
Globalization allows corporations to outsource manufacturing and service jobs from high-cost locations, creating economic opportunities with the most competitive wages and worker benefits.[84] Critics of globalization say that it disadvantages poorer countries. While it is true that free trade encourages globalization among countries, some countries try to protect their domestic suppliers. The main export of poorer countries is usually agricultural productions. Larger countries often subsidize their farmers (e.g., the EU's Common Agricultural Policy), which lowers the market price for foreign crops.[187]
Global democracy
[edit]Democratic globalization is a movement towards an institutional system of global democracy that would give world citizens a say in political organizations. This would, in their view, bypass nation-states, corporate oligopolies, ideological non-governmental organizations (NGO), political cults and mafias. One of its most prolific proponents is the British political thinker David Held. Advocates of democratic globalization argue that economic expansion and development should be the first phase of democratic globalization, which is to be followed by a phase of building global political institutions. Francesco Stipo, Director of the United States Association of the Club of Rome, advocates unifying nations under a world government, suggesting that it "should reflect the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and the world authority would have power within their sphere of competence".[188] Former Canadian Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., viewed globalization as inevitable and advocated creating institutions such as a directly elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.[189]
Global civics
[edit]Global civics suggests that civics can be understood, in a global sense, as a social contract between global citizens in the age of interdependence and interaction. The disseminators of the concept define it as the notion that we have certain rights and responsibilities towards each other by the mere fact of being human on Earth.[190] World citizen has a variety of similar meanings, often referring to a person who disapproves of traditional geopolitical divisions derived from national citizenship. An early incarnation of this sentiment can be found in Socrates, whom Plutarch quoted as saying: "I am not an Athenian, or a Greek, but a citizen of the world."[191] In an increasingly interdependent world, world citizens need a compass to frame their mindsets and create a shared consciousness and sense of global responsibility in world issues such as environmental problems and nuclear proliferation.[192]
Baha'i-inspired author Meyjes, while favoring the single world community and emergent global consciousness, warns of globalization[193] as a cloak for an expeditious economic, social, and cultural Anglo-dominance that is insufficiently inclusive to inform the emergence of an optimal world civilization. He proposes a process of "universalization" as an alternative.
Cosmopolitanism is the proposal that all human ethnic groups belong to a single community based on a shared morality. A person who adheres to the idea of cosmopolitanism in any of its forms is called a cosmopolitan or cosmopolite.[194] A cosmopolitan community might be based on an inclusive morality, a shared economic relationship, or a political structure that encompasses different nations. The cosmopolitan community is one in which individuals from different places (e.g. nation-states) form relationships based on mutual respect. For instance, Kwame Anthony Appiah suggests the possibility of a cosmopolitan community in which individuals from varying locations (physical, economic, etc.) enter relationships of mutual respect despite their differing beliefs (religious, political, etc.).[195]
Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan popularized the term Global Village beginning in 1962.[196] His view suggested that globalization would lead to a world where people from all countries will become more integrated and aware of common interests and shared humanity.[197]
International cooperation
[edit]
Military cooperation – Past examples of international cooperation exist. One example is the security cooperation between the United States and the former Soviet Union after the end of the Cold War, which astonished international society. Arms control and disarmament agreements, including the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (see START I, START II, START III, and New START) and the establishment of NATO's Partnership for Peace, the Russia NATO Council, and the G8 Global Partnership against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction, constitute concrete initiatives of arms control and de-nuclearization. The US–Russian cooperation was further strengthened by anti-terrorism agreements enacted in the wake of 9/11.[198]
Environmental cooperation – One of the biggest successes of environmental cooperation has been the agreement to reduce chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions, as specified in the Montreal Protocol, in order to stop ozone depletion. The most recent debate around nuclear energy and the non-alternative coal-burning power plants constitutes one more consensus on what not to do. Thirdly, significant achievements in IC can be observed through development studies.[198]
Economic cooperation – One of the biggest challenges of globalization in contemporary times is that many believe the progress made in the past decades is now being undone. The backsliding of globalization has led to the coinage of the term slobalization. Slobalization is a new, slower pattern of globalization.[199]
Anti-globalization movement
[edit]
Anti-globalization, or counter-globalization,[200] consists of a number of criticisms of globalization but, in general, is critical of the globalization of corporate capitalism.[201] The movement is also commonly referred to as the alter-globalization movement, anti-globalist movement, anti-corporate globalization movement,[202] or movement against neoliberal globalization. Opponents of globalization argue that power and respect in terms of international trade between the developed and underdeveloped countries of the world are unequally distributed.[203] The diverse subgroups that make up this movement include some of the following: trade unionists, environmentalists, anarchists, land rights and indigenous rights activists, organizations promoting human rights and sustainable development, opponents of privatization, and anti-sweatshop campaigners.[204]
In The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal of Democracy, Christopher Lasch analyzed[205] the widening gap between the top and bottom of the social composition in the United States. For him, our epoch is determined by a social phenomenon: the revolt of the elites, in reference to The Revolt of the Masses (1929) by the Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset. According to Lasch, the new elites, i.e. those who are in the top 20% in terms of income, through globalization which allows total mobility of capital, no longer live in the same world as their fellow-citizens. In this, they oppose the old bourgeoisie of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which was constrained by its spatial stability to a minimum of rooting and civic obligations. Globalization, according to the sociologist, has turned elites into tourists in their own countries. The denationalization of business enterprise tends to produce a class who see themselves as "world citizens, but without accepting ... any of the obligations that citizenship in a polity normally implies". Their ties to an international culture of work, leisure, information – make many of them deeply indifferent to the prospect of national decline. Instead of financing public services and the public treasury, new elites are investing their money in improving their voluntary ghettos: private schools in their residential neighborhoods, private police, garbage collection systems. They have "withdrawn from common life". Composed of those who control the international flows of capital and information, who preside over philanthropic foundations and institutions of higher education, manage the instruments of cultural production and thus fix the terms of public debate. So, the political debate is limited mainly to the dominant classes and political ideologies lose all contact with the concerns of the ordinary citizen. The result of this is that no one has a likely solution to these problems and that there are furious ideological battles on related issues. However, they remain protected from the problems affecting the working classes: the decline of industrial activity, the resulting loss of employment, the decline of the middle class, increasing the number of the poor, the rising crime rate, growing drug trafficking, the urban crisis.
D.A. Snow et al. contend that the anti-globalization movement is an example of a new social movement, which uses tactics that are unique and use different resources than previously used before in other social movements.[206]
One of the most infamous tactics of the movement is the Battle of Seattle in 1999, where there were protests against the World Trade Organization's Third Ministerial Meeting. All over the world, the movement has held protests outside meetings of institutions such as the WTO, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, and the Group of Eight (G8).[204] Within the Seattle demonstrations the protesters that participated used both creative and violent tactics to gain the attention towards the issue of globalization.
Opposition to capital market integration
[edit]
| Part of a series on |
| Capitalism |
|---|
Capital markets have to do with raising and investing money in various human enterprises. Increasing integration of these financial markets between countries leads to the emergence of a global capital marketplace or a single world market. In the long run, increased movement of capital between countries tends to favor owners of capital more than any other group; in the short run, owners and workers in specific sectors in capital-exporting countries bear much of the burden of adjusting to increased movement of capital.[207]
Those opposed to capital market integration on the basis of human rights issues are especially disturbed[according to whom?] by the various abuses which they think are perpetuated by global and international institutions that, they say, promote neoliberalism without regard to ethical standards. Common targets include the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) and free trade treaties like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). In light of the economic gap between rich and poor countries, movement adherents claim free trade without measures in place to protect the under-capitalized will contribute only to the strengthening the power of industrialized nations (often termed the "North" in opposition to the developing world's "South").[208][better source needed]
Anti-corporatism and anti-consumerism
[edit]Corporatist ideology, which privileges the rights of corporations (artificial or juridical persons) over those of natural persons, is an underlying factor in the recent rapid expansion of global commerce.[209] In recent years, there have been an increasing number of books (Naomi Klein's 2000 No Logo, for example) and films (e.g. The Corporation & Surplus) popularizing an anti-corporate ideology to the public.
A related contemporary ideology, consumerism, which encourages the personal acquisition of goods and services, also drives globalization.[210] Anti-consumerism is a social movement against equating personal happiness with consumption and the purchase of material possessions. Concern over the treatment of consumers by large corporations has spawned substantial activism, and the incorporation of consumer education into school curricula. Social activists hold materialism is connected to global retail merchandizing and supplier convergence, war, greed, anomie, crime, environmental degradation, and general social malaise and discontent. One variation on this topic is activism by postconsumers, with the strategic emphasis on moving beyond addictive consumerism.[211]
Global justice and inequality
[edit]Global justice
[edit]
The global justice movement is the loose collection of individuals and groups—often referred to as a "movement of movements"—who advocate fair trade rules and perceive current institutions of global economic integration as problems.[213] The movement is often labeled an anti-globalization movement by the mainstream media. Those involved, however, frequently deny that they are anti-globalization, insisting that they support the globalization of communication and people and oppose only the global expansion of corporate power.[214] The movement is based in the idea of social justice, desiring the creation of a society or institution based on the principles of equality and solidarity, the values of human rights, and the dignity of every human being.[215][216][217] Social inequality within and between nations, including a growing global digital divide, is a focal point of the movement. Many nongovernmental organizations have now arisen to fight these inequalities that many in Latin America, Africa and Asia face. A few very popular and well known non-governmental organizations (NGOs) include: War Child, Red Cross, Free The Children and CARE International. They often create partnerships where they work towards improving the lives of those who live in developing countries by building schools, fixing infrastructure, cleaning water supplies, purchasing equipment and supplies for hospitals, and other aid efforts.

Social inequality
[edit]
The economies of the world have developed unevenly, historically, such that entire geographical regions were left mired in poverty and disease while others began to reduce poverty and disease on a wholesale basis. From around 1980 through at least 2011, the GDP gap, while still wide, appeared to be closing and, in some more rapidly developing countries, life expectancies began to rise.[218] If we look at the Gini coefficient for world income, since the late 1980s, the gap between some regions has markedly narrowed—between Asia and the advanced economies of the West, for example—but huge gaps remain globally. Overall equality across humanity, considered as individuals, has improved very little. Within the decade between 2003 and 2013, income inequality grew even in traditionally egalitarian countries like Germany, Sweden and Denmark. With a few exceptions—France, Japan, Spain—the top 10 percent of earners in most advanced economies raced ahead, while the bottom 10 percent fell further behind.[219] By 2013, 85 multibillionaires had amassed wealth equivalent to all the wealth owned by the poorest half (3.5 billion) of the world's total population of 7 billion.[220]
Critics of globalization argue that globalization results in weak labor unions: the surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever-growing number of companies in transition weakened labor unions in high-cost areas. Unions become less effective and workers their enthusiasm for unions when membership begins to decline.[187] They also cite an increase in the exploitation of child labor: countries with weak protections for children are vulnerable to infestation by rogue companies and criminal gangs who exploit them. Examples include quarrying, salvage, and farm work as well as trafficking, bondage, forced labor, prostitution and pornography.[221]

Women often participate in the workforce in precarious work, including export-oriented employment. Evidence suggests that while globalization has expanded women's access to employment, the long-term goal[whose?] of transforming gender inequalities remains unmet and appears unattainable without regulation of capital and a reorientation and expansion of the state's role in funding public goods and providing a social safety net.[222] Furthermore, the intersectionality of gender, race, class, can be overlooked by scholars and commentators when assessing the impact of globalization.[223]
In 2016, a study published by the IMF posited that neoliberalism, the ideological backbone of contemporary globalized capitalism, has been "oversold", with the benefits of neoliberal policies being "fairly difficult to establish when looking at a broad group of countries" and the costs, most significantly higher income inequality within nations, "hurt the level and sustainability of growth."[224]
Anti-global governance
[edit]Beginning in the 1930s, opposition arose to the idea of a world government, as advocated by organizations such as the World Federalist Movement (WFM). Those who oppose global governance typically do so on objections that the idea is unfeasible, inevitably oppressive, or simply unnecessary.[225] In general, these opponents are wary of the concentration of power or wealth that such governance might represent. Such reasoning dates back to the founding of the League of Nations and, later, the United Nations.
Environmentalist opposition
[edit]

Environmentalism is a broad philosophy, ideology[226][227][228] and social movement regarding concerns for environmental conservation and improvement of the health of the environment. Environmentalist concerns with globalization include issues such as global warming, global water supply and water crises, inequity in energy consumption and energy conservation, transnational air pollution and pollution of the world ocean, overpopulation, world habitat sustainability, deforestation, biodiversity loss and species extinction.
One critique of globalization is that natural resources of the poor have been systematically taken over by the rich and the pollution promulgated by the rich is systematically dumped on the poor.[229] Some argue that Northern corporations are increasingly exploiting resources of less wealthy countries for their global activities while it is the South that is disproportionately bearing the environmental burden of the globalized economy. Globalization is thus leading to a type of" environmental apartheid".[230]
Helena Norberg-Hodge, the director and founder of Local Futures/International Society for Ecology and Culture, criticizes globalization in many ways. In her book Ancient Futures, Norberg-Hodge claims that "centuries of ecological balance and social harmony are under threat from the pressures of development and globalization." She also criticizes the standardization and rationalization of globalization, as it does not always yield the expected growth outcomes. Although globalization takes similar steps in most countries, scholars such as Hodge claim that it might not be effective to certain countries and that globalization has actually moved some countries backward instead of developing them.[231]
A related area of concern is the pollution haven hypothesis, which posits that, when large industrialized nations seek to set up factories or offices abroad, they will often look for the cheapest option in terms of resources and labor that offers the land and material access they require (see Race to the bottom).[232] This often comes at the cost of environmentally sound practices. Developing countries with cheap resources and labor tend to have less stringent environmental regulations, and conversely, nations with stricter environmental regulations become more expensive for companies as a result of the costs associated with meeting these standards. Thus, companies that choose to physically invest in foreign countries tend to (re)locate to the countries with the lowest environmental standards or weakest enforcement.
The European Union–Mercosur Free Trade Agreement, which would form one of the world's largest free trade areas,[233] has been denounced by environmental activists and indigenous rights campaigners.[234] The fear is that the deal could lead to more deforestation of the Amazon rainforest as it expands market access to Brazilian beef.[235]
See also
[edit]- Civilizing mission – Rationale or justification for colonialism
- Cosmopolitanism – Idea that all human beings are members of a single community
- Deglobalization – Process of diminishing global interdependence
- Environmental racism – Environmental injustice that occurs within a racialized context
- Eurasianism – Socio-political movement in the Russian Federation
- Franchising – Business arrangement licensing a brand and model
- Free trade – Absence of government restriction on international trade
- Global civics – Global approach to civics
- Global commons – Concept in political economic theory
- Global mobility
- Global public goods
- Global regionalization – Process where large regions are divided into smaller ones
- Globalism – Group of ideologies that advocate the concept of globalization
- Korean Wave – Global rise in popularity of Korean culture
- List of bilateral free-trade agreements
- List of globalization-related indices
- List of multilateral free-trade agreements
- Middle East and globalization – Overview of globalization in the Middle East
- Neorealism (international relations) – Theory of international relations
- North–South divide
- Outline of globalization – Overview of and topical guide to globalization
- Postdevelopment theory – Sociological theory
- Technocapitalism – Changes in capitalism associated with the emergence of new technology sectors
- The No-Nonsense Guide to Globalization
- Transnational cinema
- Transnational citizenship – Political concept
- Triadization – Macroeconomic philosophy
- United Nations Millennium Declaration – United Nations General Assembly resolution adopted in 2000
- Vermeer's Hat – 2007 book by Timothy Brook
- World Englishes – Indigenized varieties of English
References
[edit]- ^ Scholte, Jan Aart (2008). "Defining Globalisation". The World Economy. 31 (11): 1471–1502. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01019.x.
- ^ a b c d e f James, Paul; Steger, Manfred B. (2014). "A Genealogy of globalization: The career of a concept". Globalizations. 11 (4): 417–434. Bibcode:2014Glob...11..417J. doi:10.1080/14747731.2014.951186. ISSN 1474-7731. S2CID 18739651.
- ^ a b Frank, Andre Gunder. (1998). ReOrient: Global economy in the Asian age. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-21474-3
- ^ H., O'Rourke, Kevin; G., Williamson, Jeffrey (1 April 2002). "When did globalisation begin?". European Review of Economic History. 6 (1): 23–50. doi:10.1017/S1361491602000023. ISSN 1361-4916. S2CID 15767303.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Sassen, Saskia - The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Archived 16 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine (1991) – Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-07063-6
- ^ a b Albrow, Martin; King, Elizabeth (1990). Globalization, Knowledge and Society. London: Sage. ISBN 0-8039-8323-9. OCLC 22593547.
- ^ Read "Following the Money: U.S. Finance in the World Economy" at NAP.edu. National Academies Press. 1995. doi:10.17226/2134. ISBN 978-0-309-04883-5.
- ^ "Imagining the Internet". History of Information Technologies. Elon University School of Communications. Archived from the original on 23 March 2009. Retrieved 17 August 2009.
- ^ Stever, H. Guyford (1972). "Science, Systems, and Society". Journal of Cybernetics. 2 (3): 1–3. doi:10.1080/01969727208542909.
- ^ Wolf, Martin (September 2014). "Shaping Globalization" (PDF). Finance & Development. 51 (3). International Monetary Fund: 22–25. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 September 2018. Retrieved 10 August 2015.
- ^ Bank, European Investment (3 October 2024). Navigating supply chain disruptions: New insights into the resilience and transformation of EU firms. European Investment Bank. ISBN 978-92-861-5807-0.
- ^ "Globalisation, automation and the history of work: Looking back to understand the future". UNCTAD.
- ^ "Global Trade Liberalization and the Developing Countries -- An IMF Issues Brief". www.imf.org. Retrieved 10 October 2024.
- ^ a b "Globalization: Threat or Opportunity?". International Monetary Fund. 12 April 2000. Archived from the original on 18 August 2017. Retrieved 28 November 2019.
- ^ a b c Babones, Salvatore (2008). "Studying Globalization: Methodological Issues". In Ritzer, George (ed.). The Blackwell Companion to Globalization. Malden: John Wiley & Sons. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-470-76642-2. OCLC 232611725.
- ^ "6 Pros and Cons of Globalization in Business to Consider". Business Insights Blog. 1 April 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2024.
- ^ "Weighing the Pros and Cons of Globalization". www.wilsoncenter.org. 5 March 2003. Retrieved 4 September 2024.
- ^ Sorinel, Cosma (2012). "Globalization and Mondialisation – A Conceptual Analysis". Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Decembre. Ovidius University Annals. Economic Sciences Series (2): 27–30.
- ^ Hopkins, Antony G., ed. (2002). Globalization in World History. New York: Norton. pp. 4–8. ISBN 0-393-97942-3. OCLC 50028410.
- ^ Bakari, Mohamed El-Kamel (2013). "Globalization and Sustainable Development: False Twins?". New Global Studies. 7 (3): 23–56. doi:10.1515/ngs-2013-021. ISSN 1940-0004. S2CID 154786395.
- ^ Karl Marx; Friedrich Engels (2017). "Manifesto of the Communist Party". The Communist Manifesto (PDF). Pluto Press. pp. 47–103. doi:10.2307/j.ctt1k85dmc.4. ISBN 978-1-78680-025-1. JSTOR j.ctt1k85dmc. S2CID 53056560.
- ^ Giddens, Anthony (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. p. 64. ISBN 0-7456-0793-4. OCLC 22305142.
- ^ Robertson, Roland (1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture (Reprint. ed.). London: Sage. ISBN 978-0-8039-8187-4. OCLC 28634687.
- ^ Held, David; Goldblatt, David; McGrew, Anthony; Perraton, Jonathan (1999). Global Transformations Cambridge: Polity Press. ISBN 978-0-7456-1498-4
- ^ a b c "DHL Global Connectedness Index 2014" (PDF). DHL. 11 March 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 February 2015. Retrieved 31 March 2015.
- ^ Larsson, Thomas. (2001). The Race to the Top: The Real Story of Globalization Washington, DC: Cato Institute. p. 9. ISBN 978-1-930865-15-0
- ^ a b James, Paul (2005). "Arguing Globalizations: Propositions Towards an Investigation of Global Formation". Globalizations. 2 (2): 193–209. Bibcode:2005Glob....2..193J. doi:10.1080/14747730500202206. S2CID 146553776.
- ^ Steger, Manfred (2009). Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-19-955226-9.
- ^ Manfred B. Steger; Paul James (2013). "Levels of Subjective Globalization: Ideologies, Imaginaries, Ontologies". Perspectives on Global Development and Technology. 12 (1–2).
- ^ James, Paul (2014). "Faces of Globalization and the Borders of States: From Asylum Seekers to Citizens". Citizenship Studies. 18 (2): 208–23. doi:10.1080/13621025.2014.886440. S2CID 144816686.
- ^ Friedman, Thomas L. "The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention". Emerging: A Reader. Ed. Barclay Barrios. Boston: Bedford, St. Martins, 2008. 49
- ^ Fotopoulos, Takis. (2001). "Globalization, the reformist Left and the Anti-Globalization 'Movement.'" Democracy & Nature: The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, 7:(2) (July 2001). Archived 26 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Lechner, Frank J.; Boli, John, eds. (2012). The Globalization Reader (4th ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-65563-4. OCLC 723530747.
- ^ Henwood, Doug (13 November 2003). "Beyond Globophobia". The Nation. ISSN 0027-8378. Archived from the original on 29 October 2014.
- ^ Clark, Ross (20 March 2004). "Globophobia". The Spectator. Archived from the original on 22 December 2014. Retrieved 29 October 2014.
- ^ Ritzer, George, ed. (2008). The Blackwell Companion to Globalization. Malden: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 16–. ISBN 978-0-470-76642-2. OCLC 232611725.
- ^ a b c O'Rourke, Kevin H.; Williamson, Jeffrey G. (2002). "When Did Globalization Begin?". European Review of Economic History. 6 (1): 23–50. doi:10.1017/S1361491602000023. S2CID 15767303.
- ^ a b c d Martell, Luke (2010). The Sociology of Globalization (reprint ed.). Policy Press. ISBN 9780745636740.
- ^ Kochler, Hans (2000). Globality versus Democracy: The Changing Nature of International Relations in the Era of Globalization. Vienna: International Progress Organization. p. 35.
- ^
For example:
Fine, John Van Antwerp (1983). "Colonization". The Ancient Greeks: A Critical History (revised ed.). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. p. 81. ISBN 9780674033146. Retrieved 16 June 2025.
Greek colonization of the Black Sea region was of great importance for subsequent Greek history. A huge area, rich in metals, timber, grain, fish and many other products, was thus opened to a Greek world whose resources in raw materials and food products were inadequate for a constantly growing population.
- ^
Reed, C. M. (11 December 2025). "Classical modes and patterns of exchange". Maritime Traders in the Ancient Greek World. Cambridge University Press. p. 19. ISBN 9781139439060. Retrieved 16 June 2025.
[...] in the classical period the grain trade offered work for large numbers of maritime traders, and the need for grain at Athens, and probably elsewhere too, became acute enough to make these traders indispensable.
- ^
For example:
Zuchtriegel, Gabriel (2018). "Mountains: the Limits of Greekness and Citizenship". Colonization and Subalternity in Classical Greece: Experience of the Nonelite Population. New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 175. ISBN 9781108419031. Retrieved 16 June 2025.
The process of Lucanization ultimately turned the use of Greek visual language from being a privilege of the elite into a ubiquitous mass phenomenon that supplanted traditional forms of expression. In this light, the history of Italiote red-figure vases in Lucania also represents the history of a transformation of traditional versions of cultural diversity that were partly homogenized and integrated within new hybrid forms — a form of Mediterranean globalization that some individuals and groups may have perceived as a cultural loss, while others gained socially and economically.
- ^ Jerry Bentley, Old World Encounters: Cross-Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-Modern Times (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 32.
- ^ Jerry Bentley, Old World Encounters: Cross-Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-Modern Times (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 33.
- ^ "The Legacy of the Silk Road". Yale Global. 25 January 2013. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 31 March 2015.
- ^ Burke, Edmund (2009). "Islam at the Center: Technological Complexes and the Roots of Modernity". Journal of World History. 20 (2): 186. ISSN 1045-6007. JSTOR 40542756.
- ^ Ghosh, Paramita (12 March 2024). "Building a new road". The New Indian Express. Retrieved 29 August 2024.
- ^ Hopkins, A.G., ed., 2003. Globalization in World History. New York City: Norton. ISBN 0-393-97942-3 pp. 4–5, 7
- ^ Chaudhuri, K.N. (1965\1999). The English East India Company: The Study of an Early Joint-stock Company 1600–1640 (Vol. 4). London: Routledge/Thoemmes Press.
- ^ China and the Birth of Globalization in the 16th Century, by Dennis O. Flynn and Arturo Giráldez
- ^ Gordon, Peter; Morales, Juan José (12 October 2017). The Silver Way: China, Spanish America and the Birth of Globalisation, 1565-1815. Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-7343-9943-4 – via Google Books.
- ^ h. o'Rourke, Kevin; Prados de la Escosura, Leandro; Daudin, Guillaume (2010). "Trade and empire". Trade and empire (Chapter 4) – The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. pp. 100–01. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511794834.006. ISBN 978-0-521-88202-6. S2CID 155275323. Archived from the original on 3 March 2018. Retrieved 2 March 2018.
{{cite book}}:|website=ignored (help) - ^ a b c Levinson, Marc. "Sample Chapter for Levinson, M.: The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger". The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger. Princeton University Press. Archived from the original on 22 January 2013. Retrieved 17 February 2013.
- ^ a b Gittins, Ross (12 June 2006). "How the invention of a box changed our world – Business – smh.com.au". The Sydney Morning Herald. Archived from the original on 14 November 2015. Retrieved 17 February 2013.
- ^ "World Exports as Percentage of Gross World Product". Global Policy Forum. Archived from the original on 12 July 2008. Retrieved 11 November 2009.
- ^ a b Varghese, N.V. 2008, 'Globalization of higher education and cross-border student mobility', International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO
- ^ a b Lourdes, Benería; Gunseli, Berik; Maria S., Floro (2016). Gender, Development, and Globalization: Economics as if all people mattered. New York: Routledge. p. 95. ISBN 978-0-415-53748-3.
- ^ Klein, Naomi (2008). The Shock Doctrine. Canada: Vintage. p. 68.
- ^ Lourdes, Benería; Deere, Carmen Diana; Kabeer, Naila (8 August 2012). "Gender and International Migration: Globalization, Development and Governance". Feminist Economics. 18 (2): 1–33. doi:10.1080/13545701.2012.688998. S2CID 144565818.
- ^ Rai. "The History of International Development: Concepts and Contexts". Women, Gender and Development Reader: 15.
- ^ Wolf, Martin (2001). "Will the nation-state survive globalization?". Foreign Affairs. 80 (1): 178–190. doi:10.2307/20050051. JSTOR 20050051. Archived from the original on 11 September 2017. Retrieved 12 September 2017.
- ^ Ritzer, George (2011). Globalization: The Essentials. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
- ^ a b Saggi, Kamal (2002). "Trade, Foreign Direct Investment, and International Technology Transfer: A Survey". World Bank Research Observer. 17 (2): 191–235. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.17.7732. doi:10.1093/wbro/17.2.191. S2CID 16620922.
- ^ Hunt, Michael H. (2004). The World Transformed 1945 to present. p. 399.
- ^ "The Open Market Internet Index". Treese.org. 11 November 1995. Archived from the original on 1 June 2013. Retrieved 15 June 2013.
- ^ "World Stats". Internet World Stats. Miniwatts Marketing Group. 30 June 2012. Archived from the original on 23 June 2011. Retrieved 4 January 2015.
- ^ a b "Signs of life". The Economist. 15 November 2014. Archived from the original on 2 September 2017. Retrieved 29 August 2017.
- ^ Faiola, Anthony. (2009). "A Global Retreat As Economies Dry Up." The Washington Post, 5 March 2009. Archived 4 December 2010 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Allison Morrow (24 May 2022). "Globalization is coming undone, and that's a huge red flag". CNN.
- ^ Walker, Marcus; Hayashi, Yuka (9 August 2023). "Sputtering Trade Fuels Fears of a Fractured Global Economy". The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
- ^ Zumbrun, Josh. "Is Globalization in Decline? A New Number Contradicts the Consensus". WSJ. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
- ^ Ganapati, Sharat; Wong, Woan Foong (August 2023). "How Far Goods Travel: Global Transport and Supply Chains from 1965–2020". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 37 (3): 3–30. doi:10.1257/jep.37.3.3. hdl:10419/272042. ISSN 0895-3309.
- ^ "Melting Arctic ice could transform international shipping routes, study finds | Brown University". www.brown.edu. 25 November 2024. Retrieved 10 December 2024.
- ^ "Czech foreign owned companies take second biggest dividend yield in 2017:report". Radio Prague. 7 March 2018.
- ^ a b Joshi, Rakesh Mohan, (2009) International Business, Oxford University Press, New Delhi and New York ISBN 0-19-568909-7.
- ^ Riley, T: "Year 12 Economics", p. 9. Tim Riley Publications, 2005
- ^ Hill, Charles W.L. (2014). International business: competing in the global marketplace (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-811277-5. OCLC 864808614.
- ^ "What Is Globalization?". PIIE. 29 October 2018. Retrieved 25 May 2020.
- ^ Pitelis, Christos; Roger Sugden (2000). The nature of the transnational firm. Routledge. p. H72. ISBN 978-0-415-16787-1.
- ^ "Multinational Corporations". Archived from the original on 14 April 2018. Retrieved 23 December 2016.
- ^ Roy D. Voorhees, Emerson L. Seim, and John I. Coppett, "Global Logistics and Stateless Corporations", Transportation Practitioners Journal 59, 2 (Winter 1992): 144–51.
- ^ O'Sullivan, Arthur; Sheffrin, Steven M. (2003). Economics: Principles in Action. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. p. 453. ISBN 978-0-13-063085-8.
- ^ European Commission. "The EU Single Market: Fewer barriers, more opportunities". Europa web portal. Archived from the original on 1 October 2007. Retrieved 27 September 2007.
"Activities of the European Union: Internal Market". Europa web portal. Archived from the original on 25 June 2007. Retrieved 29 June 2007. - ^ a b Kuruvilla, Sarosh; Ranganathan, Aruna (October 2008). "Economic Development Strategies And Macro- And Micro-Level Human Resource Policies: The Case Of India's "Outsourcing" Industry". Industrial & Labor Relations Review. 62 (1): 39–72. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.662.425. doi:10.1177/001979390806200103. S2CID 12104735.
- ^ "Outsourcing to Africa: The world economy calls | The Economist". 16 April 2011. Archived from the original on 11 May 2011. Retrieved 16 April 2011.
- ^ Robinson, William I. "Globalization and the sociology of Immanuel Wallerstein: A critical appraisal". International Sociology. 1–23.
- ^ James, Paul (2006). Globalism, Nationalism, Tribalism. London: Sage Publications. Archived from the original on 29 April 2020. Retrieved 20 December 2017.
- ^ Manfred B. Steger and Paul James, 'Ideologies of Globalism', in Paul James and Manfred B. Steger, eds, Globalization and Culture: Vol. 4, Ideologies of Globalism Archived 8 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine, Sage Publications, London, 2010. Inda, Jonathan; Rosaldo, Renato (2002). "Introduction: A World in Motion". The Anthropology of Globalization. Wiley-Blackwell.
- ^ Cowen, Tyler; Barber, Benjamin (May–June 2003). "Globalization and Culture" (PDF). Cato Policy Report. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 November 2012. Retrieved 15 March 2017.
- ^ Nadeem, S (2009) Macaulay's (Cyber) Children: The Cultural Politics of Outsourcing in India Archived 20 June 2010 at the Wayback Machine. Cultural Sociology
- ^ Hacker, Violaine (2011). "Budovanie mediálneho priemyslu a podpora hodnotovo orientovanej spoločnosti v globalizácii: od chichotského výberu k pragmatickým výhodám EU občanov" [Building Medias Industry while Promoting a Community of Values in the Globalization: From Quixotic Choices to Pragmatic Boon for EU Citizens]. Politické vedy. 14 (2): 64–74. ISSN 1335-2741.
- ^ Fangjun, Cao (1 September 2009). "Modernization Theory and China's Road to Modernization". Chinese Studies in History. 43 (1): 7–16. doi:10.2753/CSH0009-4633430101. ISSN 0009-4633. S2CID 145504998.
- ^ McAlister, Elizabeth (September 2005). "Globalization and the Religious Production of Space". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 44 (3): 249–255. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00283.x.
- ^ "Globalization and Sport: A Review by Susan Froetschel". Archived from the original on 23 December 2016.
- ^ "Overview of Olympic Games". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 30 April 2015. Retrieved 4 June 2008.
- ^ "2006 FIFA World Cup broadcast wider, longer and farther than ever before". FIFA.com. Fédération Internationale de Football Association. 6 February 2007. Archived from the original on 20 January 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2009.
- ^ Dunmore, Tom (2011). Historical Dictionary of Soccer. Scarecrow Press. p. 235. ISBN 978-0-8108-7188-5.
The World Cup is now the most-watched sporting event in the world on television, above even the Olympic Games.
- ^ Wong, Glenn M. (8 March 2012). The Comprehensive Guide to Careers in Sports. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. pp. 144–. ISBN 978-1-4496-0203-1.
The World Cup is the most-watched sporting event in the world. In 2006, more than 30 billion viewers in 214 countries watched the World Cup on television, and more than 3.3 million spectators attended the 64 matches of the tournament.
- ^ Clayton, Thomas (August 2004). ""Competing Conceptions of Globalization" Revisited: Relocating the Tension between World-Systems Analysis and Globalization Analysis". Comparative Education Review. 48 (3): 274–294. doi:10.1086/421180. ISSN 0010-4086. S2CID 56099753.
- ^ Throsby, David (2002). "The music industry in the new millennium: Global and Local Perspectives." Paper prepared for The Global Alliance for Cultural Diversity Division of Arts and Cultural Enterprise UNESCO, Paris.
- ^ "Ethnic fusion Music". Allmusic. Archived from the original on 29 April 2012. Retrieved 20 February 2020.
- ^ "Worldbeat". Allmusic. Archived from the original on 3 May 2012. Retrieved 20 February 2020.
- ^ "World Fusion Music". worldmusic.nationalgeographic.com. Archived from the original on 14 March 2012.
- ^ "Chili: Small Fruit Sets Global Palettes on Fire" Archived 31 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, History of Globalization, YaleGlobal Online.
- ^ Beard, David and Keneth Gloag. 2005. Musicology: The Key Concepts. London and New York: Routledge.
- ^ "International Flows of Selected Goods and Services" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 July 2010. Retrieved 31 July 2010.
- ^ "Why do we need religion in a globalized world?". Aleteia — Catholic Spirituality, Lifestyle, World News, and Culture. 11 April 2018. Archived from the original on 12 April 2018. Retrieved 12 April 2018.
- ^ Ghosh, Biswajit (June 2011). "Cultural Changes and Challenges in the Era of Globalization: The Case of India". Journal of Developing Societies. 27 (2): 153–175. doi:10.1177/0169796X1102700203. ISSN 0169-796X. S2CID 145494090.
- ^ Cuccioletta, Donald. Multiculturalism or Transculturalism: Towards a Cosmopolitan Citizenship., London Journal of Canadian Studies 2001/2002 Vol. 17, Plattsburgh State University of New York, Interdisciplinary Research Group on the Americas
- ^ a b transcultural Archived 5 August 2018 at the Wayback Machine, thefreedictionary.com
- ^ transcultural Archived 2 January 2018 at the Wayback Machine, yourdictionary.com
- ^ George Modelski; Tessaleno Devezas; William R. Thompson (20 December 2007). Globalization as Evolutionary Process: Modeling Global Change. Routledge. p. 59. ISBN 978-1-135-97764-1.
- ^ "These are all the countries where the US has a military presence". Quartz. 2 April 2015. Archived from the original on 2 August 2019. Retrieved 2 August 2019.
- ^ Pawel Zaleski Global Non-governmental Administrative System: Geosociology of the Third Sector, [in:] Gawin, Dariusz & Glinski, Piotr [ed.]: "Civil Society in the Making", IFiS Publishers, Warszawa 2006
- ^ "Vaccine Delivery". Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Archived from the original on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 6 June 2013.
- ^ "The Index of Global Philanthropy and Remittances 2012. Hudson Institute Center for Global Prosperity" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 July 2012.
- ^ "North Korean Refugees NGO". Northkoreanrefugees.com. 20 October 2008. Archived from the original on 18 June 2010. Retrieved 23 August 2010.
- ^ United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2 July 2008). "UNHCR Freedom in the World 2008 – North Korea". Unhcr.org. Archived from the original on 18 October 2012. Retrieved 23 August 2010.
- ^ Kabeer, Nalia; Simeen; Mahmud (2004). "Rags, Riches and Women Workers: Export-Oriented Garment Manufacturing in Bangladesh," from Linking Women Producers and Workers with Global Markets. London: Commonwealth Secretariat. pp. 137, 147, 148, 150, 152. ISBN 978-0-85092-798-6.
- ^ Wright W., Melissa (2007). "The Dialectics of Still Life: Murder, Women, and Disposability," from Disposable Women and Other Myths of Global Capitalism. New York: Routledge. pp. 73, 82, 83.
- ^ Zimmerer, Karl S. (2006). Globalization & New Geographies of Conservation. University of Chicago Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-226-98344-8.
- ^ Krishnan, Armin (2016). War as Business: Technological Change and Military Service Contracting. Routledge. p. 157. ISBN 978-1-317-00049-5.
- ^ James, Paul (2014). "Faces of Globalization and the Borders of States: From Asylum Seekers to Citizens". Citizenship Studies. 18 (2): 208–23. doi:10.1080/13621025.2014.886440. S2CID 144816686.
- ^ Boustan, Adain May. "Fertility and Immigration." UCLA. 15 January 2009.
- ^ Siebeck, Florian. "Flugzeugparkplatz im Outback: Schlaf in der Wüste". FAZ.NET (in German). ISSN 0174-4909. Retrieved 16 May 2020.
- ^ "UNWTO World Tourism Barometer" (PDF). UNWTO World Tourism Barometer. 11 (1). January 2013. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 February 2013. Retrieved 9 April 2013.
- ^ "Visa Openness Report 2015 January 2016" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 January 2016.
- ^ "immigration". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 18 May 2016. Retrieved 11 May 2016.
- ^ "immigrate". Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 28 March 2014. Retrieved 27 March 2014.
- ^ "Who's who: Definitions". London, England: Refugee Council. 2016. Archived from the original on 16 September 2015. Retrieved 7 September 2015.
- ^ "Mainstreaming of Migration in Development Policy and Integrating Migration in the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda" (PDF). www.ilo.org. Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 May 2017. Retrieved 23 December 2016.
- ^ "Most London babies have foreign-born parent Archived 25 June 2018 at the Wayback Machine". Financial Times. 1 December 2016.
- ^ Landis, Dan; Bhawuk, Dharm P. S. (2020). The Cambridge handbook of intercultural training (4th ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press & Assessment. ISBN 978-1-108-85418-4. OCLC 1135909636.
- ^ Caligiuri, Paula (2021). Build Your Cultural Agility The Nine Competencies of Successful Global Professionals. London: Kogan Page, Limited. ISBN 978-1-78966-660-1. OCLC 1239982517.
- ^ Gribble, C (2008). "Policy options for managing international student migration: the sending country's perspective". Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 30 (1): 25–39. doi:10.1080/13600800701457830. S2CID 155059201.
- ^ "Measuring digital development: Facts and figures 2023". Telecommunication Development Bureau, International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Retrieved 14 June 2024.
- ^ "Company Info – Facebook Newsroom". Facebook. Archived from the original on 15 November 2015. Retrieved 23 December 2016.
- ^ Berglez, Peter (2008). "What is Global Journalism?". Journalism Studies. 9 (6): 845–58. doi:10.1080/14616700802337727. S2CID 142859567.
- ^ "The Coronavirus Could Finally Kill the Wild Animal Trade". Foreign Policy. 25 February 2020. Archived from the original on 17 March 2020. Retrieved 6 April 2020.
- ^ "Coronavirus: Which countries have confirmed cases?". Al Jazeera. 6 April 2020. Archived from the original on 31 March 2020. Retrieved 6 April 2020.
- ^ "Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins". Archived from the original on 5 September 2019. Retrieved 25 March 2020.
- ^ "Disaster in motion: 3.4 million travelers poured into US as coronavirus pandemic erupted". ABC News. 2 April 2020. Archived from the original on 2 April 2020. Retrieved 6 April 2020.
- ^ "KOF Index of Globalization". ethz.ch. The KOF Swiss Economic Institute. 2014. Archived from the original on 31 May 2012. Retrieved 21 January 2013.
- ^ 16 October 2006 Archived 6 March 2008 at the Wayback Machine. Data for the year 2006. No longer published.
- ^ Vujakovic, Petra (2010). "How to Measure Globalization? A New Globalization Index (NGI)". Atlantic Economic Journal. 38 (2): 237. doi:10.1007/s11293-010-9217-3.
- ^ Overland, Indra (1 April 2016). "Energy: The missing link in globalization". Energy Research & Social Science. 14: 122. Bibcode:2016ERSS...14..122O. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2016.01.009. hdl:11250/2442076. Archived from the original on 5 February 2018. Retrieved 7 April 2018.
- ^ a b Sen, Amartya K. (1970). Collective choice and social welfare. San Francisco, CA: Holden-Day.
- ^ "Definition of xenophobia in English from the Oxford dictionary". oxforddictionaries.com. Archived from the original on 31 July 2016. Retrieved 23 December 2016.
- ^ "Define Xenophobia at Dictionary.com". Dictionary.com. Archived from the original on 1 January 2011. Retrieved 23 December 2016.
- ^ Guido Bolaffi. Dictionary of race, ethnicity and culture. SAGE Publications Ltd., 2003. p. 332.
- ^ "Poverty Analysis – Measuring Inequality". worldbank.org. Archived from the original on 22 June 2013. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
- ^ "The Happy Planet Index". Neweconomics.org. Archived from the original on 26 September 2009. Retrieved 2 June 2013.
- ^ Capra, Fritjof (2002). The Hidden Connections. New York, New York: Random House. ISBN 978-0-385-49471-7.
- ^ Sorrells, Kathryn. Intercultural Communication: Globalization and Social Justice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013. Print.
- ^ "Pope: isolationism and populism lead to war – Vatican News". www.vaticannews.va. 9 August 2019. Archived from the original on 9 August 2019. Retrieved 9 August 2019.
- ^ Guttal, Shalmali (2007). "Globalisation". Development in Practice. 17 (4/5): 523–531. doi:10.1080/09614520701469492. ISSN 0961-4524. JSTOR 25548249. S2CID 218523141.
- ^ a b c Fiss, Peer C.; Hirsch, Paul M. (February 2005). "The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and Sensemaking of an Emerging Concept". American Sociological Review. 70 (1): 29–52. doi:10.1177/000312240507000103. S2CID 16331519.
- ^ "Africans and Asians Tend to View Globalization Favorably; Europeans and Americans are More Skeptical". WorldPublicOpinion.org. 7 November 2006. Archived from the original on 12 February 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2019.
- ^ "Widespread Unease about Economy and Globalization – Global poll" (PDF). BBC World Service. 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 September 2014. Retrieved 24 March 2015.
- ^ Gordon, Philip. 2004. "Globalization: Europe's Wary Embrace" Archived 29 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine. Yale Global, 1 November 2004.
- ^ Fox, Justin (15 November 2007). "Why Denmark Loves Globalization". Time. Archived from the original on 23 October 2019. Retrieved 28 November 2019.
- ^ Ip, Greg (18 July 2008). "The Declining Value Of Your College Degree". The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Archived from the original on 29 February 2020. Retrieved 29 November 2019.
- ^ Heizo, Takenaka; Ryokichi, Chida (1998). "Japan" (PDF). In Morrison, Charles E.; Soesastro, Hadi (eds.). Domestic Adjustments to Globalization. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange. pp. 76–102. ISBN 4-88907-012-5. OCLC 40657196. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 April 2011.
- ^ a b Bhagwati, Jagdish (2004). In Defense of Globalization. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-533093-9. OCLC 719371219.
- ^ Shoa, S. Rajgopal (2002). "Reclaiming Democracy, the Anti-globalization Movement in South Asia". Feminist Review (70): 134–137. JSTOR 1395975.
- ^ Graham, Carol (1 January 2011). "Winners and Losers: Perspectives on Globalization from the Emerging Market Economies". Brookings. Archived from the original on 11 May 2011.
- ^ Fuller, Dan; Geide-Stevenson, Doris (Fall 2003). "Consensus Among Economists: Revisited" (PDF). Journal of Economic Review. 34 (4): 369–87. doi:10.1080/00220480309595230. S2CID 143617926. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 September 2004. Retrieved 22 December 2016.(registration required)
- ^ Friedman, Milton (1993). "The Case for Free Trade". Hoover Digest. 1997 (4): 42. Bibcode:1993SciAm.269e..42B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1193-42. Archived from the original on 22 January 2007.
- ^ Whaples, Robert (2006). "Do Economists Agree on Anything? Yes!". The Economists' Voice. 3 (9). doi:10.2202/1553-3832.1156. S2CID 201123406.
- ^ Mankiw, Gregory (7 May 2006). "Outsourcing Redux". Archived from the original on 2 April 2007. Retrieved 22 January 2007.
- ^ "Poll Results | IGM Forum". www.igmchicago.org. Archived from the original on 22 June 2016. Retrieved 1 July 2016.
- ^ Sachs, Jeffrey (2005). The End of Poverty. New York: Penguin Press. ISBN 978-1-59420-045-8. OCLC 57243168.
- ^ Peet, Richard; Hartwick, Elaine (2015). Theories of Development: Contentions, Arguments, Alternatives (3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press. p. 2. ISBN 978-1-4625-1957-6. OCLC 908634816.
But economic growth can occur without touching problems like inequality or poverty when all the increase in income goes to a relatively few people.
- ^ Beaudet, Pierre; Schafer, Jessica; Haslam, Paul A. (2012). Introduction to International Development: Approaches, Actors, and Issues. Oxford University Press. p. 112. ISBN 978-0-19-544020-1.
According to Oxfam International, the contrasting experiences of Latin America and East Asia illustrate that globalization-induced growth and poverty can co-exist. Even when the market expands, 'poor people are often excluded from opportunities by a lack of productive assets, weak infrastructure, poor education, and ill-health'
- ^ Conversi, Daniele (2009) 'Globalization, ethnic conflict and nationalism Archived 7 June 2011 at the Wayback Machine', in B. Turner (ed.) Handbook of Globalization Studies. London: Routledge/ Taylor & Francis; Barkawi, Tarak (2005) Globalization and War. Rowman & Littlefield; Smith, Dennis (2006) Globalization: The Hidden Agenda. Cambridge: Polity Press. See also Barber, Benjamin R., Jihad vs. McWorld. Ballantine Books, 1996
- ^ "Human Development Report 2003" (PDF). UNDP. 2003. Archived (PDF) from the original on 18 April 2013. Retrieved 6 April 2013.
- ^ Berg, Andrew G.; Ostry, Jonathan D. (2011). "Equality and Efficiency". Finance and Development. 48 (3). Archived from the original on 3 July 2012. Retrieved 10 September 2012.
- ^ Martin Wolf (2004). Why Globalization Works. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-10252-9. Retrieved 6 April 2013.[dead link]
- ^ Dollar, David; Kraay, Aart. "Trade, Growth, and Poverty". Finance and Development. International Monetary Fund. Archived from the original on 11 January 2012. Retrieved 6 June 2011.
- ^ E.g. Pyun, Ju Hyun; Lee, Jong-Wha (21 March 2009). "Globalisation promotes peace". Archived from the original on 25 October 2014. Retrieved 25 October 2014.
- ^ See, for example, Roy Harrod, The Life of John Maynard Keynes, Macmillan, 1951; Donald Markwell, John Maynard Keynes and International Relations: Economic Paths to War and Peace, Oxford University Press, 2006. Keynes had colourfully described the globalization before World War I in The Economic Consequences of the Peace, Macmillan, 1919, chapter 2.
- ^ Lee, Laurence (17 May 2007). "WTO blamed for India grain suicides". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 19 May 2007. Retrieved 17 May 2007.
- ^ Bakan, Joel (2004). The Corporation. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-0-7432-4744-3.
- ^ Perkins, John (2004). Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. ISBN 978-1-57675-301-9.
- ^ "Fórum Social Mundial". Forumsocialmundial.org.br. Archived from the original on 18 September 2008. Retrieved 31 July 2010.
- ^ "NAFTA at 10". Economic Policy Institute. Archived from the original on 30 June 2012. Retrieved 7 February 2012.
- ^ a b Hurst E. Charles. Social Inequality: Forms, Causes, and consequences, 6th ed. p. 41
- ^ "USACOR.org". USACOR.org. 28 July 2009. Archived from the original on 20 May 2010. Retrieved 31 July 2010.
- ^ Roche, Douglas. "The Case for a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly" (PDF). The World Federalist Movement – Institute for Global Policy. Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 May 2013. Retrieved 28 May 2012.
- ^ Altinay, Hakan (2010). "The Case for Global Civics". Global Economy and Development at Brookings. Archived from the original on 3 June 2010.
- ^ "Global Parliament | World Citizens Association (Australia)". australia. Archived from the original on 19 August 2019. Retrieved 19 August 2019.
- ^ Altinay, Hakan (June 2010). "A Global Civics: Necessary? Feasible?". Global Policy. Archived from the original on 26 September 2012. Retrieved 16 July 2012.
- ^ Meyjes (also: Posthumus Meyjes), Gregory Paul (1999). "Language and Universalization: a 'Linguistic Ecology' Reading of Bahá'í Writ". The Journal of Bahá'í Studies. Vol. IX (1). Ottawa: Association for Bahá'í Studies. pp. 51–63.
- ^ "Cosmopolitan". Dictionary.com. Archived from the original on 2 January 2016. Retrieved 7 April 2012.
- ^ Kwame Anthony Appiah, "Cosmopolitan Patriots," Critical Inquiry 23, no. 3 (Spring, 1997): 617–39.
- ^ Marshall McLuhan and Bruce R. Powers (17 September 1992) The Global Village: Transformations in World Life and Media in the 21st century . Oxford University Press: 17 September 1992
- ^ Chapman, Roger. Culture wars: an encyclopedia of issues, viewpoints, and voices, Volume 1. 2009: M.E. Sharp
- ^ a b "International cooperation as a stepping-stone to a world government". Global Policy Journal. Archived from the original on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 15 June 2013.
- ^ "Slowbalisation". The Economist. Vol. 430, no. 9127. 26 January 2019. ProQuest 2171135679.
- ^ Jacques Derrida (May 2004) Enlightenment past and to come Archived 19 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine, speech at the party for 50 years of Le Monde diplomatique
- ^ Morris, Douglas "Globalization and Media Democracy: The Case of Indymedia", Shaping the Network Society, MIT Press 2003. Courtesy link to (pre-publication version) FIS.utoronto.ca Archived 4 March 2009 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Juris, Jeffrey S. (2008). Networking Futures: The Movements against Corporate Globalization. Durham: Duke University Press. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-8223-4269-4.
- ^ Staggenborg, S. (2011). Social movements (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
- ^ a b Engler, M. (30 May 2007). "The Anti-Globalization Movement Defined Share The World's Resources". Archived from the original on 17 December 2024. Retrieved 14 March 2013.l
- ^ "The treachery of the lites Elite sense of irresponsibility". The Independent. 10 March 1995. Archived from the original on 27 August 2017. Retrieved 19 September 2018.
- ^ Snow, D.A., Soule, S.A., & Kriesi, H. (2004). The Blackwell companion to social movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
- ^ Frieden, Jeffry A. (1991). "Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies in a World of Global Finance". International Organization. 45 (4): 425–51. doi:10.1017/s0020818300033178. ISSN 1531-5088. JSTOR 2706944. S2CID 154738660.
- ^ Kolas, Logan. "How Tariffs and Regressive Trade Policies Hurt the Poor". The Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 30 March 2019. Retrieved 30 March 2019.
- ^ Ottaway, Marina (September 2001). "Corporatism Goes Global". Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations. 7 (3). doi:10.1163/19426720-00703006. Archived from the original on 3 September 2014. Retrieved 28 August 2014.
- ^ Storper Michael (2000). "Lived effects of the Contemporary Economy: Globalization, Inequality, and Consumer Society". Public Culture. 12 (2): 375–409. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.571.5793. doi:10.1215/08992363-12-2-375. S2CID 53599498.
- ^ Cohen, Maurie J. (July 2013). "Collective dissonance and the transition to post-consumerism". Futures. 52: 42–51. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2013.07.001.
- ^ "GINI index (World Bank estimate) | Data". data.worldbank.org. Retrieved 23 July 2020.
- ^ Mertes, Tom; Bello, Walden F.; Bové, José; Cassen, Bernard; et al., eds. (2004). A Movement of Movements: Is Another World Really Possible?. London: Verso. ISBN 1-85984-504-5. OCLC 53243132.
- ^ della Porta, D. 2005. "The Social Bases of the Global Justice Movement: Some Theoretical Reflections and Empirical Evidence from the First European Social Forum." Civil Society and Social Movements Programme Paper No. 21.Geneva: UNRISD (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development).
- ^ Education and Social Justice By J. Zajda, S. Majhanovich, V. Rust, 2006, ISBN 1-4020-4721-5
- ^ Nursing ethics: across the curriculum and into practice By Janie B. Butts, Karen Rich, Jones and Bartlett Publishers 2005, ISBN 978-0-7637-4735-0
- ^ "Legal Birth Definition Act – Act 135 of 2004" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 1 June 2012.
- ^ Rosling, Hans (2013). "How much do you know about the world?". BBC News. BBC. Archived from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 9 July 2014.
- ^ Stiglits Joseph E. (13 October 2013). "Inequality is a Choice". New York Times. Archived from the original on 25 November 2018. Retrieved 9 July 2014.
- ^ "Outlook on the Global Agenda 2014" (PDF). World Economic Forum. Archived (PDF) from the original on 10 February 2015. Retrieved 9 July 2014.
- ^ Pavcnik, Nina; Pavcnik, Nina (September 2005). "Child Labor in the Global Economy". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 19 (1): 199–220. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.488.791. doi:10.1257/0895330053147895.
- ^ Seguino, Stephanie; Grown, Caren (November 2006). "Gender equity and globalization: macroeconomic policy for developing countries". Journal of International Development. 18 (8): 1081–104. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.589.4614. doi:10.1002/jid.1295. Pdf version – via the World Bank. Archived 5 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Lourdes, Benería (2014). Gender, development, and globalization: economics as if all people mattered. Berik, Günseli, Floro, Maria (Second ed.). New York. ISBN 978-0-415-53748-3. OCLC 903247621.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ Foroohar, Rana (3 June 2016). "Globalization's True Believers Are Having Second Thoughts". TIME. Archived from the original on 17 June 2016. Retrieved 12 July 2018.
- ^ Kennedy, Paul. (2006.) The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations. New York: Harper Collins. ISBN 978-0-375-50165-4
- ^ "Ideology and Sustainability". Formal.stanford.edu. Archived from the original on 4 February 2012. Retrieved 13 June 2012.
- ^ Ronald Bailey from the February 2002 issue (February 2002). "Debunking Green Myths". Reason.com. Archived from the original on 10 July 2012. Retrieved 13 June 2012.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - ^ Donald Gibson. Environmentalism: Ideology and Power. Nova Science Pub Inc. 2003
- ^ Low, Nicholas. (2002). Global Ethics and Environment. Routledge Science. ISBN 978-0-415-19735-9.
- ^ Lechner, Frank J., and John Boli. 2012. The Globalization Reader, 4th ed. Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 978-0-470-65563-4.
- ^ Norberg-Hodge, Helena (1992). Ancient futures: learning from Ladakh (Sierra Club Books paperback ed.). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. ISBN 978-0-87156-643-0.
- ^ Levinson, Arik; M. Scott Taylor (2008). "Unmasking the Pollution Haven Effect" (PDF). International Economic Review. 49 (1): 223–54. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2354.2008.00478.x. S2CID 40982519. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 June 2018. Retrieved 29 November 2019.
- ^ "Farmers, environmentalists slam 'sell-out' EU-Mercosur trade deal". France24. 29 June 2019. Archived from the original on 25 August 2019. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
- ^ "EU urged to halt trade talks with S. America over Brazil abuses". France 24. 18 June 2019. Archived from the original on 25 August 2019. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
- ^ "We must not barter the Amazon rainforest for burgers and steaks". The Guardian. 2 July 2019. Archived from the original on 24 August 2019. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
Further reading
[edit]- Ampuja, Marko. Theorizing Globalization: A Critique of the Mediatization of Social Theory (Brill, 2012)
- Conner, Tom, and Ikuko Torimoto, eds. Globalization Redux: New Name, Same Game (University Press of America, 2004).
- Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. "Globalization." in Handbook of Political Anthropology (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018).
- Frey, James W. "The Global Moment: The Emergence of Globality, 1866–1867, and the Origins of Nineteenth-Century Globalization." The Historian 81.1 (2019): 9. online Archived 3 December 2019 at the Wayback Machine, focus on trade and Suez Canal
- Gunder Frank, Andre, and Robert A. Denemark. ReOrienting the 19th Century: Global Economy in the Continuing Asian Age (Paradigm Publishers, 2013).
- Hansen, Valerie (2020). The Year 1000: When Explorers Connected the World―and Globalization Began. Scribner. ISBN 978-1501194108.
- Hopkins, A.G., ed. Globalization in World History (Norton, 2003).
- Lechner, Frank J., and John Boli, eds. The Globalization Reader (4th ed. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012).
- Leibler, Anat. "The Emergence of a Global Economic Order: From Scientific Internationalism to Infrastructural Globalism." in Science, Numbers and Politics (Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019) pp. 121–145 online[dead link].
- Mir, Salam. "Colonialism, Postcolonialism, Globalization, and Arab Culture." Arab Studies Quarterly 41.1 (2019): 33–58. online
- Olstein, Diego (2015) "Proto-globalization and Proto-glocalizations in the Middle Millennium." In Kedar, Benjamin and Wiesner-Hanks, Merry (Eds.), Cambridge World History. Volume 5: Expanding Webs of Exchange and Conquest, 500–1500 CE. Cambridge University Press, pp. 665–684
- Pfister, Ulrich (2012), Globalization, EGO – European History Online, Mainz: Institute of European History, retrieved: 25 March 2021 (pdf).
- Pieterse, Jan Nederveen. Globalization and culture: Global mélange (Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).
- Rosenberg, Justin. "Globalization Theory: A Post Mortem," International Politics 42:1 (2005), 2–74.
- Steger, Manfred B. Globalization: A Very Short Introduction (4th ed. Oxford University Press, 2017)
- Steger, Manfred B. Globalization in the 21st Century ((Rowman & Littlefield, 2024)
- Van Der Bly, Martha C.E. "Globalization: A Triumph of Ambiguity," Current Sociology 53:6 (November 2005), 875–893
- Wallerstein, Immanuel. "Globalization or the Age of Transition? A Long-Term View of the Trajectory of the World System," International Sociology 15:2 (June 2000), 251–267.
External links
[edit]- Comprehensive discussion of the term at the Site Global Transformations Archived 12 October 2009 at the Portuguese Web Archive
- Globalization Website (Emory University) Links, Debates, Glossary etc.
- BBC News Special Report – "Globalisation"
- Globalization collected news and commentary at The Guardian
- "Globalization" Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Analysis of the idea and its history.
- OECD Globalization statistics
- Mapping Globalization, Princeton University
- List of Global Development Indexes and Rankings
Globalization
View on GrokipediaDefinition and Etymology
Conceptual Foundations
Globalization, at its core, refers to the process of increasing economic interdependence among nations through the expansion of cross-border trade in goods and services, flows of capital, labor migration, and dissemination of technology and information.[2] This interdependence arises from reductions in barriers such as tariffs and quotas, which facilitate specialization and exchange based on differing national endowments of resources, skills, and productivity levels.[1] Empirically, such integration has been driven by technological advancements lowering transportation and communication costs—for instance, container shipping costs per ton fell by over 90% from 1950 to 2000—enabling more efficient global allocation of production factors.[11] While cultural and political dimensions exist, the conceptual foundation emphasizes economic mechanisms, where voluntary exchanges across borders generate gains from trade without requiring altruism or coercion. A foundational theory supporting this integration is David Ricardo's principle of comparative advantage, articulated in 1817, which posits that even if one country produces all goods more efficiently than another (absolute advantage), both can benefit from trade by specializing in goods where their opportunity costs are relatively lower.[12] Opportunity cost, the value of the next-best alternative forgone, serves as the analytical key: for example, if Country A forgoes fewer units of cloth to produce an additional unit of wine than Country B, A should specialize in wine despite higher absolute productivity in cloth production.[13] This principle extends Adam Smith's 1776 idea of division of labor beyond national boundaries, arguing that global specialization amplifies productivity by matching tasks to comparative strengths, such as labor-intensive manufacturing in low-wage economies versus capital-intensive innovation in high-wage ones.[14] Real-world application is evident in post-1945 trade patterns, where tariff reductions under GATT averaged 35% globally by 1994, correlating with a fivefold increase in world trade volume relative to GDP.[1] From first principles, global integration rests on causal mechanisms of cost reduction and incentive alignment: policies eliminating distortions like subsidies or regulations that favor domestic over foreign production allow markets to reveal true scarcities and efficiencies.[15] Five principal channels underpin this: (1) merchandise trade, which grew from 10% of global GDP in 1950 to 25% by 2000; (2) foreign direct investment, rising from $68 billion in 1980 to $1.3 trillion in 2000; (3) portfolio capital flows; (4) migration, with international remittances reaching $700 billion annually by 2016; and (5) technology diffusion via multinational firms.[16] These flows are not inevitable but emerge when transaction costs—geographic, informational, or institutional—decline, as seen in the integration of supply chains where intermediate goods trade tripled as a share of total trade from 1980 to 2010.[2] Critiques, such as those questioning static assumptions in Ricardo's model amid dynamic learning effects, acknowledge potential short-term disruptions but affirm long-term efficiency gains when supported by empirical data on poverty reduction, with extreme poverty rates falling from 42% in 1980 to 10% by 2015 in integrating economies.[14][11]Historical Usage and Evolution
The term "globalization" first appeared in English-language usage during the 1930s, primarily in contexts related to global education and international awareness rather than economic or cultural integration.[17] Early instances, such as those documented in the Oxford English Dictionary, reflected limited application without widespread adoption.[17] The related verb "globalize" emerged in print by 1944, followed by "globalization" entering the Merriam-Webster dictionary in 1951, still denoting processes of worldwide scope but not yet a dominant concept.[18] Widespread usage of "globalization" gained traction in the late 1970s and accelerated in the 1980s, coinciding with technological advancements in communication and transportation that facilitated cross-border exchanges.[1] Economist Theodore Levitt is credited with popularizing the term in its modern economic sense through his 1983 Harvard Business Review article "The Globalization of Markets," where he described the convergence of consumer preferences and corporate strategies across national boundaries due to homogenized global demand.[19] This marked a shift from descriptive or educational connotations to an emphasis on market integration and multinational business expansion. By the 1990s, "globalization" had evolved into a defining framework for analyzing international economic interdependence, trade liberalization, and institutional reforms, often invoked in discussions of post-Cold War integration.[20] Its scope broadened beyond economics to encompass cultural diffusion, political governance, and technological connectivity, though critics noted that earlier historical processes—like 19th-century trade networks—embodied similar dynamics without the label.[5] Usage proliferated in academic, policy, and media discourse, with annual mentions in major publications rising sharply; for instance, Google Ngram data shows frequency increasing over 20-fold from 1980 to 2000, reflecting its role in framing debates on sovereignty, inequality, and development.[2] This evolution underscored a conceptual progression from niche terminology to a lens for interpreting multifaceted global interactions, albeit with varying definitions across disciplines—economic sources prioritizing trade metrics, while social analyses highlighted uneven power dynamics.[1]Historical Development
Pre-Modern Exchanges
Pre-modern exchanges encompassed interconnected trade networks across Afro-Eurasia that facilitated the movement of goods, technologies, and ideas long before the era of European oceanic exploration. These interactions, often termed archaic globalization, emerged as early as 3000 BCE with trade between Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley, involving commodities such as textiles and metals.[21] By the first millennium BCE, expansive routes linked distant civilizations, driven by demand for luxury items and resources, though limited by overland and coastal navigation technologies that restricted scale compared to later periods.[5] The Silk Road network, originating around the 2nd century BCE under the Han Dynasty in China, exemplified overland exchanges spanning from China through Central Asia to the Mediterranean. This system transported silk westward from China, horses and glass eastward from the Roman Empire, and spices and gems from India, fostering economic interdependence across Eurasia over 1,500 years until disruptions in the 14th century.[22] Cultural diffusion accompanied material trade, with Buddhism spreading from India to China via these routes, and technologies like papermaking eventually reaching the Islamic world.[5] Maritime trade in the Indian Ocean, active from at least the 1st century CE, connected East Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, India, and Southeast Asia to China, emphasizing monsoon winds for efficient dhow and junk vessel navigation. Key exports included African ivory and gold, Indian textiles and spices, and Chinese porcelain, creating a web of port cities like Malacca and Calicut that amplified cross-cultural contacts.[5] These exchanges introduced crops such as bananas from Southeast Asia to Africa and facilitated the dissemination of Hinduism and later Islam across participating regions.[23] Trans-Saharan trade routes, utilizing camel caravans introduced around the 3rd century CE, bridged West Africa with North Africa and the Mediterranean from approximately the 8th century CE onward. West African gold and slaves flowed north in exchange for salt, textiles, and horses from the Islamic north, sustaining empires like Ghana and Mali, which controlled nodal points such as Timbuktu.[24] This network not only circulated essential resources but also spread Islam southward, influencing governance and scholarship in sub-Saharan societies.[25] Collectively, these pre-modern networks integrated much of the Afro-Eurasian landmass into a proto-global economy, where regional surpluses addressed distant shortages, though interactions remained episodic and regionally dominant rather than universally synchronized due to technological and political barriers.[26] Archaeological evidence, including traded artifacts like Roman coins in India and Chinese silk in Egypt, underscores the tangible extent of these exchanges, which laid foundational patterns for later globalization without implying equivalence to modern interconnectedness.[21]Early Modern Expansion
The early modern expansion of globalization commenced with Iberian initiatives in the late 15th century, driven by the pursuit of direct maritime routes to Asian spice markets to circumvent Ottoman intermediaries and Venetian monopolies. Portugal, under the sponsorship of figures like Prince Henry the Navigator from the 1410s, advanced along the African coast, culminating in Bartolomeu Dias rounding the Cape of Good Hope in 1488. Vasco da Gama's voyage from 1497 to 1499 established the first sea link to India, arriving at Calicut in 1498 and enabling Portuguese control over key Indian Ocean trade nodes.[27][28] Concurrently, Spain financed Christopher Columbus's 1492 expedition, which inadvertently reached the Caribbean islands, initiating sustained transatlantic contact. The 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas delineated spheres of influence, granting Portugal eastern routes and Spain western domains.[28] Portuguese expansion rapidly extended to fortified trading posts across Africa, India, and Southeast Asia, securing monopolies on spices like pepper and cloves. By 1510, Afonso de Albuquerque captured Goa as a base in India, followed by Malacca in 1511, which controlled access to the Spice Islands. Spain's American ventures involved conquests yielding vast silver resources from mines like Potosí, starting in the 1540s, fueling global commerce. Ferdinand Magellan's 1519–1522 circumnavigation confirmed Earth's sphericity and interconnected oceans, while the Manila galleon trade from 1565 linked Acapulco to the Philippines, exchanging American silver for Chinese silks and porcelain. These networks integrated disparate economies, with European ships carrying African slaves, Asian goods, and New World commodities across hemispheres.[29][30] The biological dimension, termed the Columbian Exchange, transferred crops, livestock, and pathogens post-1492, profoundly altering demographics and agriculture worldwide. Old World introductions to the Americas included wheat, horses, and cattle, enhancing productivity but also enabling conquest; New World exports like maize, potatoes, and tomatoes boosted Eurasian caloric intake, supporting population growth from the 16th century. Conversely, European diseases such as smallpox caused catastrophic declines in indigenous American populations, exceeding 90% mortality in many regions by 1600, facilitating colonization.[30][31] Northern European entrants, including the Dutch East India Company founded in 1602 with a monopoly on Asian trade, challenged Iberian dominance by establishing Batavia in 1619 and innovating joint-stock financing for long-distance ventures. The English East India Company, formed in 1600, similarly expanded into Asian markets, laying infrastructural foundations for sustained global interdependence despite mercantilist rivalries.[32][30]Industrial and Imperial Era
The Industrial Revolution, beginning in Britain around 1760 and spreading across Europe and North America by the mid-19th century, fundamentally transformed production through mechanization and fossil fuel energy, creating unprecedented demand for raw materials such as cotton, rubber, and minerals while generating surplus manufactured goods seeking global markets.[33] This era's globalization manifested as intensified economic interdependence, propelled by European imperial expansion that secured resource extraction and trade routes.[34] Imperial powers justified territorial control through notions of economic necessity, though causal analysis reveals profit-driven motives rooted in industrial capitalism's expansionary logic.[35] Technological innovations were pivotal enablers of this phase. Steam-powered shipping, exemplified by vessels like the SS Great Britain launched in 1843, reduced transoceanic travel times dramatically, while expansive railroad networks—totaling over 1 million kilometers globally by 1914—facilitated inland resource transport.[36] The electric telegraph, commercialized from the 1840s onward, enabled near-instantaneous communication across continents, synchronizing financial markets and coordinating imperial administration.[2] These advancements lowered transport costs by up to 90% for some routes between 1820 and 1910, fostering a "first wave" of globalization culminating before World War I.[5] European imperialism directly integrated peripheral economies into global circuits. The Opium Wars (1839–1842 and 1856–1860) compelled China to cede Hong Kong, open treaty ports like Shanghai, and legalize opium imports, reversing its trade surplus and flooding markets with British textiles and Indian opium to balance tea purchases.[37] [38] In Africa, the Scramble—formalized at the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885—partitioned the continent among powers like Britain, France, and Belgium, enabling extraction of commodities such as Congolese rubber and South African gold, which fueled European industry.[39] By 1914, colonial holdings accounted for substantial shares of global trade, with Britain's empire alone comprising 25% of world GDP.[40] Quantitative metrics underscore the era's trade surge. World export volumes expanded nearly 100-fold from 1800 to 1913, with the trade-to-output ratio rising from 18% in 1870 to 30% by 1913, reflecting deeper integration before protectionist reversals and war disrupted flows.[41] [42] The adoption of the classical gold standard by major economies from the 1870s stabilized exchange rates, further incentivizing cross-border commerce despite underlying imperial asymmetries that privileged metropolitan cores.[36] This period's causal dynamics—industrial demand met by imperial supply chains—laid foundational patterns of unequal exchange persisting into later globalization phases.[34]20th Century Institutions and Conflicts
The League of Nations, established in January 1920 as part of the Treaty of Versailles, sought to promote international cooperation on economic and social issues alongside peacekeeping, but its economic efforts were hampered by the absence of major powers like the United States and lacked binding mechanisms for trade disputes.[43][44] In the interwar years, rising protectionism intensified economic isolation; the U.S. Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, enacted on June 17, 1930, increased duties on over 20,000 imported goods by an average of 20%, triggering retaliatory tariffs from trading partners and contributing to a collapse in global trade volumes by approximately two-thirds between 1929 and 1933.[45][46] World War I and II further severed global supply chains, with wartime blockades and destruction reducing international commerce to a fraction of prewar levels and underscoring the fragility of interconnected economies without institutional safeguards.[47] Post-World War II reconstruction efforts prioritized institutional frameworks to stabilize and expand global economic ties. The Bretton Woods Conference, held from July 1 to 22, 1944, in New Hampshire, gathered delegates from 44 Allied nations to design a new monetary order, resulting in the creation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on December 27, 1945, tasked with monitoring exchange rates, providing short-term loans to address balance-of-payments deficits, and preventing competitive devaluations.[48][49] Complementing the IMF, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, later part of the World Bank Group) began operations in June 1946 to finance infrastructure and development projects, disbursing initial loans totaling $250 million by 1947 for Europe's rebuilding.[50] These institutions embodied a commitment to fixed exchange rates pegged to the U.S. dollar and gold, aiming to avert the beggar-thy-neighbor policies of the 1930s.[47] Parallel to monetary reforms, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was negotiated in Geneva and signed on October 30, 1947, by 23 countries, establishing rules to reduce tariffs and non-tariff barriers through reciprocal concessions, with initial cuts averaging 35% on $10 billion in trade.[51][52] GATT's successive negotiation rounds, such as the 1947 Geneva Round and later Kennedy Round (1964-1967), progressively dismantled protectionist measures among participants, fostering a rules-based trading system that by the 1970s covered duties on industrial goods reduced by over 80% from 1947 levels.[51] The United Nations, chartered on June 26, 1945, supported these efforts through agencies like the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD, founded 1964) to integrate developing nations, though its broader mandate emphasized conflict resolution over economic liberalization.[53] The Cold War (1947-1991) introduced ideological conflicts that bifurcated global trade, with Western institutions like GATT and the IMF deepening integration among capitalist economies while the Soviet-led Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (COMECON, 1949) insulated Eastern bloc countries, resulting in intra-bloc trade dominating and inter-bloc exchanges falling to less than 5% of total world trade by the 1980s.[54][55] Proxy wars and embargoes, such as U.S. restrictions on technology exports to the USSR, further constrained cross-ideological flows, yet Western-led globalization accelerated, with GATT membership expanding to 123 countries by 1994 and trade among OECD nations growing at 7% annually in the 1950s-1960s.[56] These tensions highlighted globalization's uneven advance, propelled by institutions in the liberal sphere but checked by geopolitical rivalries until the Soviet collapse.[57]Post-1980s Acceleration
The acceleration of globalization after the 1980s was propelled by the end of the Cold War, which dismantled ideological barriers to economic integration. The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union on December 26, 1991, facilitated the transition of Eastern European economies and former Soviet republics toward market-oriented systems, integrating them into global trade networks.[58][59] This shift reduced state-controlled trade restrictions, enabling rapid increases in cross-border exchanges with Western economies. Institutional developments further intensified this momentum through multilateral trade liberalization. The establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) on January 1, 1995, succeeding the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), expanded binding rules on tariffs and non-tariff barriers, covering goods, services, and intellectual property for 164 member states by 2023. China's accession to the WTO on December 11, 2001, integrated its vast labor force into global production, boosting world merchandise exports by facilitating access to low-cost manufacturing; China's share of global exports rose from 3.9% in 2001 to 14.7% by 2021.[4][60] Regional agreements, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) effective January 1, 1994, and European Union enlargements in 2004 and 2007, similarly lowered intra-bloc barriers, amplifying trade volumes. Technological innovations, particularly in information and communications, drastically reduced coordination costs for international transactions. The commercialization of the internet in the early 1990s, following Tim Berners-Lee's proposal of the World Wide Web in 1989 and its public release in 1991, enabled instantaneous global data exchange, fostering e-commerce and just-in-time supply chains. By 2000, internet users worldwide exceeded 400 million, correlating with a surge in foreign direct investment (FDI) flows, which grew from $59 billion in 1982 to $1.3 trillion by 2000.[58][61] Empirical indicators underscore this intensification: world trade as a percentage of global GDP increased from approximately 39% in 1980 to 51% by 2000 and peaked at around 61% in 2008 before the global financial crisis. Merchandise trade volumes expanded at an average annual rate of 4% from 1995 to 2023 under WTO auspices, outpacing GDP growth and reflecting deeper economic interdependence. These trends were supported by policy shifts toward deregulation and privatization in major economies, such as the U.S. under Reaganomics from 1981 and the UK's under Thatcher from 1979, which encouraged capital mobility and multinational expansion.[62][4][5]Economic Dimensions
Trade Liberalization and Patterns
Trade liberalization refers to the reduction of government-imposed barriers to international trade, such as tariffs, quotas, and subsidies, primarily achieved through multilateral negotiations. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), established in 1947, facilitated eight rounds of talks that progressively lowered average industrial tariffs among participants from approximately 40% to less than 5% by the mid-1990s.[51] [63] These efforts culminated in the Uruguay Round (1986–1994), which expanded coverage to services, intellectual property, and agriculture, and established the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 to enforce rules and resolve disputes.[51] Patterns of global trade have shifted markedly due to liberalization, with world trade in goods and services expanding to $32.2 trillion in 2024, reflecting a 4% annual average growth since the WTO's inception.[64] Trade openness, measured as the ratio of trade to global GDP, increased from about 24% in 1960 to 56.6% in 2024, driven by lower barriers and technological advances in transport and communication.[65] Early post-war patterns emphasized North-North trade among developed economies, but liberalization enabled a surge in South-North flows, particularly after China's WTO accession in 2001, which boosted its export share from 4% of global merchandise trade in 2000 to over 14% by 2023.[3] This reorientation has manifested in concentrated supply chains, with intra-industry trade rising among advanced economies and vertical specialization increasing between developed and emerging markets.[66] The United States, for instance, experienced a persistent trade deficit, peaking at $946 billion in 2022, as imports from low-cost producers like China displaced domestic manufacturing, contributing to deindustrialization in sectors such as textiles and electronics.[67] In Europe, intra-EU trade dominates, accounting for over 60% of members' total trade, while the EU as a bloc shifted toward Asia amid geopolitical tensions. Recent patterns show diversification, or "friendshoring," with U.S. imports from China declining post-2018 tariffs, redirecting to Mexico and Vietnam, which saw export surges of 20% and 15% respectively to the U.S. by 2023.[67] Empirically, trade liberalization correlates with accelerated GDP growth, investment, and export expansion in liberalizing economies, as comparative advantages are realized through resource reallocation.[68] However, it has uneven distributional effects: while aggregate welfare gains occur via lower consumer prices and productivity improvements, import-competing sectors face job losses—U.S. manufacturing employment fell by 5 million jobs from 2000 to 2010, partly attributable to China trade shocks—and widened income inequality in advanced economies without adequate adjustment policies.[69] Developing countries often experience improved growth but vulnerability to terms-of-trade shocks, underscoring that benefits depend on institutional quality and complementary reforms rather than liberalization alone.[70]Capital Flows and Investment
Capital flows in the context of globalization refer to the cross-border movement of financial resources, primarily through foreign direct investment (FDI), which involves establishing lasting interests such as ownership of at least 10% of voting power in foreign enterprises, and portfolio investment, encompassing shorter-term holdings in stocks, bonds, and other securities.[71] These flows expanded markedly after the 1980s due to capital account liberalizations in many developing and emerging economies, often encouraged by international financial institutions like the IMF as part of structural adjustment programs.[72] By reducing barriers to entry, such deregulations facilitated greater integration with global markets, enabling recipient countries to access foreign savings for infrastructure and production expansion, though they also introduced risks of volatility from reversible "hot money."[73] Global FDI inflows, a key metric of long-term capital commitment, surged from approximately $54 billion in 1980 to over $1.4 trillion by 2000, driven by mergers and acquisitions in industrialized nations and policy shifts toward openness in Asia and Latin America.[74] This growth reflected broader globalization trends, with FDI stocks worldwide rising from 5% of global GDP in 1980 to around 40% by the early 2000s, according to UNCTAD estimates.[75] Post-2008 financial crisis, flows fluctuated: peaking at nearly $1.6 trillion in 2021 amid recovery, then declining to $1.3 trillion in 2023 and $1.5 trillion in 2024, influenced by geopolitical tensions and economic slowdowns.[76] [77] Portfolio flows, more sensitive to interest rate differentials and sentiment, exhibited even greater swings; for instance, emerging markets saw net inflows of $1.1 trillion in 2006-2007 before abrupt reversals during the 2008 crisis, exacerbating output drops.[78] Empirical studies indicate that FDI inflows correlate with higher economic growth in recipient countries through technology spillovers and productivity gains, particularly when institutional quality is strong, as evidenced by panel data analyses across 50+ economies from 1970 onward.[79] However, sudden stops in capital inflows—reversals exceeding 4% of GDP—have triggered crises, such as the 1997 Asian financial meltdown, where Thailand's baht devaluation followed portfolio outflows amid fixed exchange rate unsustainability, leading to regional contagion and GDP contractions of 5-10% in affected nations.[80] Capital account liberalization has also been linked to rising income inequality; surges in inflows widen gaps by boosting returns to capital owners over labor, with econometric evidence from 1980-2010 showing a 1% GDP increase in inflows associated with a 0.1-0.2 percentage point rise in Gini coefficients in middle-income countries.[81] [82]| Period | Global FDI Inflows (USD billions) | Key Drivers/Events |
|---|---|---|
| 1980-1989 | Average ~200 | Early liberalizations in OECD, limited emerging market access[83] |
| 1990-2000 | Rose to 1,400 (peak) | M&A boom, Asia/Latin openings[74] |
| 2001-2007 | 600-1,800 | Post-dotcom recovery, China WTO entry[84] |
| 2008-2020 | Volatile, avg. ~1,200 | GFC reversal, then rebound[76] |
| 2021-2024 | 1,600 to 1,500 | Pandemic stimulus, then geopolitical drags[77] |
Global Supply Chains and Production
Global supply chains, often termed global value chains (GVCs), refer to the international fragmentation of production where different stages of manufacturing, assembly, and distribution occur across borders to leverage comparative advantages in costs, skills, or resources.[87] This model has expanded significantly since the mid-20th century, driven by technological innovations like containerization—introduced in 1956 by Malcom McLean, which slashed shipping costs by standardizing cargo handling and enabling efficient intermodal transport.[88] By the 1980s, lean manufacturing practices, pioneered by Toyota in the 1970s, further encouraged just-in-time inventory systems that minimized holding costs but relied on reliable cross-border flows.[89] China's entry into the World Trade Organization on December 11, 2001, marked a pivotal acceleration, as it opened vast low-wage labor pools and infrastructure investments, drawing in assembly operations for electronics, textiles, and consumer goods.[90] Consequently, trade in intermediate goods—components and parts used in further production—now constitutes over 50% of global trade, up from lower shares pre-1990s, reflecting deep integration where final products embody value added from multiple nations.[87] GVCs account for approximately 20% of global gross output as of the 2010s, a rise from 4% in 1995, with foreign value added in exports reaching 60% worldwide by 2006.[91][92] Prominent examples include the electronics sector, where Apple's iPhone supply chain sources semiconductors from Taiwan, displays from South Korea, and final assembly in China, optimizing costs but creating dependencies on Asian hubs.[93] In automobiles, firms like Toyota and General Motors procure engines from Japan or Mexico, chips from Taiwan, and assemble vehicles in the United States or Europe; this fragmentation boosted efficiency but proved fragile during disruptions.[94] The COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 onward exposed these vulnerabilities: factory shutdowns in China early 2020 halted component flows, while a semiconductor shortage—exacerbated by demand surges and production cuts—idled auto plants globally, reducing U.S. vehicle output by over 1.2 million units in 2021 alone.[95] These events underscored risks from over-reliance on concentrated suppliers, particularly in geopolitically tense regions, prompting shifts toward diversification, nearshoring (e.g., Mexico for U.S. firms), and reshoring incentives like the U.S. CHIPS Act of 2022, which allocated $52 billion to domestic semiconductor production.[96][97] Empirical analyses indicate that while GVCs have lowered consumer prices and spurred growth in developing economies—China's manufacturing share rose to 28% of global output by 2019—they have also amplified propagation of shocks, as seen in the 2021-2022 supply bottlenecks that contributed to 7-9% inflation spikes in advanced economies.[92][98] Despite resilience through redundancy in some sectors, ongoing U.S.-China trade frictions since 2018 have accelerated reconfiguration, with firms reallocating 10-20% of sourcing away from China by 2023, though full decoupling remains limited by entrenched efficiencies.[99]Empirical Economic Impacts
Empirical analyses indicate that globalization, through expanded trade and capital flows, has driven higher economic growth rates across much of the world. A comprehensive review of studies shows that integration into global markets has enabled nearly all countries to achieve richer incomes in recent decades, with trade openness correlating positively with GDP per capita increases.[100] In Organization of Islamic Cooperation countries, for instance, economic globalization exhibited statistically significant positive effects on growth from 1970 to 2009.[101] This growth has facilitated dramatic reductions in global poverty. The rapid expansion of international trade post-1990 lifted approximately one billion people out of extreme poverty, as export-oriented industrialization in developing nations boosted incomes and employment.[102] Extreme poverty rates declined from 36% of the world population in 1990 to about 10% by 2015, predominantly due to accelerated development in Asia via market integration.[103] Despite these aggregate benefits, globalization has unevenly distributed gains within countries, often exacerbating income inequality. Meta-analyses reveal a small-to-moderate inequality-increasing effect from economic globalization, particularly through financial channels that favor capital over labor.[104] The International Monetary Fund observes that while global inequality has fallen over three decades due to convergence between nations, within-country disparities have risen in most advanced and emerging economies.[105] In labor markets of high-income countries, import competition has imposed costs on specific sectors. The surge in Chinese exports to the United States, known as the "China shock," resulted in 2.0 to 2.4 million job losses from 1999 to 2011, mainly in manufacturing, with enduring wage depression and reduced labor force participation in affected regions.[106] Trade liberalization similarly reduced wages for low-skilled workers in import-vulnerable industries, contributing to greater overall inequality.[107] [108] Consumers in integrating economies have benefited from lower prices and greater product variety due to global supply chains. Globalization diminished manufacturing costs and curbed inflation, enhancing real purchasing power in advanced economies.[109] These effects underscore globalization's role in efficiency gains, though adjustment costs for displaced workers highlight the need for targeted policies to mitigate localized harms.[108]Cultural and Social Dimensions
Cultural Diffusion and Homogenization
Globalization promotes the diffusion of cultural practices through expanded trade, media, and migration, enabling the rapid exchange of ideas, languages, and consumer habits across societies. The English language exemplifies this process, with approximately 1.5 billion speakers worldwide as of 2025, including 370 million native speakers, functioning as a primary medium for global commerce, diplomacy, and digital communication.[110][111] This linguistic spread, accelerated since the late 20th century by internet proliferation and multinational education systems, facilitates cross-cultural interactions but embeds Western linguistic and idiomatic frameworks into non-native contexts.[112] Cultural homogenization manifests in the global proliferation of standardized consumer symbols and lifestyles, often dominated by American-origin enterprises. McDonald's Corporation, for instance, operated over 41,000 restaurants across more than 115 countries in 2023, introducing uniform fast-food models that prioritize efficiency and familiarity in dining experiences. Similarly, Hollywood productions captured about 70% of global box office revenue in 2024, down from over 90% in the early 2000s, shaping international preferences for narrative styles, visual effects, and entertainment formats.[113] These patterns reflect causal mechanisms like economies of scale in media production and brand marketing, which favor replicable, low-context cultural exports over diverse local variants.[114] Countervailing forces, including glocalization—where global products adapt to local tastes—mitigate outright homogenization, fostering hybrid forms rather than erasure. McDonald's illustrates this by offering culturally attuned menus, such as the vegetarian McAloo Tikki in India or beef-free options in Muslim-majority regions, which integrate regional ingredients and taboos into core operations.[115] Empirical analyses reveal that while superficial convergence occurs in urban consumer spheres, national values exhibit divergence, with non-Western societies retaining distinct social norms amid global exposure.[116] Migration further drives diffusion through bidirectional exchanges, yielding multicultural enclaves where traditions coexist and evolve without uniform assimilation.[117] Academic claims of pervasive Western cultural imperialism often overlook these adaptive dynamics, overemphasizing elite media influence while understating grassroots resilience and local agency in reshaping global inflows.[118]Migration and Demographic Shifts
Globalization has facilitated a surge in international migration through reduced transportation costs, enhanced communication networks, and economic integration that amplify wage disparities between origin and destination countries. The stock of international migrants reached 304 million in mid-2024, constituting 3.7% of the global population, a quadrupling from 77 million in 1960.[119] [120] Annual migration flows approximated 39.1 million people in 2022, reflecting heightened mobility enabled by global trade and policy frameworks.[121] Europe and Asia each hosted about 87 million and 86 million migrants respectively in 2024, accounting for 61% of the total stock, while developed regions increasingly rely on inflows to counter native population stagnation.[122] In destination countries, particularly in Europe and North America, migration has become the primary driver of population growth amid sub-replacement fertility rates among natives, which averaged below 1.8 children per woman in many advanced economies as of 2017. Immigrants often exhibit higher total fertility rates initially—2.18 children per woman in the United States compared to 1.76 for natives in 2017—contributing to a younger age structure and partially mitigating aging populations.[123] [124] For instance, without net migration, the projected population of developed regions would be 9% smaller by 2050, as native birth rates fail to sustain workforce replacement. Empirical analyses indicate that immigration slows population aging by introducing working-age individuals, though its effect remains modest, redistributing only about 0.14% of high-development-country populations and insufficient to fully offset dependency ratio increases without sustained high inflows.[125] [126] [127] For origin countries, emigration generates substantial remittances, totaling $905 billion globally in 2024, with $685 billion directed to low- and middle-income nations, often exceeding foreign direct investment and supporting household consumption.[128] [129] However, this outflow exacerbates demographic imbalances, including skill shortages and elevated youth dependency in sending regions, while second- and third-generation immigrants in host countries tend to converge toward native fertility levels, limiting long-term demographic rejuvenation.[130] Over time, these shifts alter ethnic compositions, with foreign-born individuals and their descendants comprising a growing share of populations in high-immigration nations, influencing labor markets and social cohesion without proportionally resolving structural aging challenges.[131]Social Structures and Family Changes
Globalization has facilitated the transition from extended to nuclear family structures in many societies, driven by urbanization, labor migration, and economic integration that prioritize individual mobility over collective kinship ties. In developing regions, rural-to-urban migration—accelerated by global trade and investment—has fragmented traditional multigenerational households, with census data from China showing a rise in migrant households containing only the family head or partial members, from 7.4% in 1990 to 46.1% in 2000, reflecting weakened extended family authority.[132] This shift correlates with declining family capital and inheritance practices amid industrialization, leading to smaller, more autonomous units better suited to urban labor markets but increasing vulnerability to economic shocks.[133] Fertility rates have converged downward globally under globalization's influence, with political and economic openness explaining much of the decline from highs of around 5 children per woman in the mid-20th century to below replacement levels (2.1) in over 75% of countries by 2050 projections.[134][135] Exposure to global markets enhances women's workforce participation and education, delaying childbearing and reducing family sizes, as seen in lowest-low fertility contexts like Germany where globalization metrics predict lower birth rates independent of domestic policies.[136] In the developing world, this manifests as a breakdown of traditional fertility controls, with globalization weakening normative pressures for large families through media diffusion of individualistic values.[137] Marriage patterns have adapted similarly, with delayed ages at first marriage and rising divorce rates tied to global cultural homogenization and economic individualism. Worldwide divorce rates have increased since the 1970s, coinciding with trade liberalization and migration flows that expose populations to diverse norms, fostering higher acceptance of marital dissolution—evident in rising rates across Europe and Asia.[138][139] These changes, while empowering individual choice, strain social cohesion, as single-parent households face elevated poverty risks compared to intact families, a disparity amplified in globalized economies with flat wages and extended work hours.[140][141] Migration, a core globalization mechanism, induces family separations that reshape roles and dynamics, with remittances supporting distant kin but often eroding daily parental involvement and increasing child behavioral issues in origin communities.[142] Urban inflows exacerbate housing pressures and service strains, contributing to non-traditional arrangements like lone-parent or reconstituted families, particularly in megacities where global labor demands prioritize career over kinship obligations.[143] Empirical patterns indicate these disruptions compound fertility declines, as migrants delay family formation amid uncertainty, perpetuating below-replacement demographics in high-emigration zones.[144]Political and Institutional Dimensions
International Organizations and Treaties
The United Nations, established on October 24, 1945, serves as a primary forum for international cooperation, including economic aspects of globalization through bodies like the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), which addresses trade and development issues among developing countries.[53] The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, both founded in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference, promote global financial stability and provide loans for development projects, respectively, facilitating capital flows and economic integration across borders.[50] These institutions have supported globalization by encouraging policy reforms that open economies to international finance and trade.[145] The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), signed in 1947 by 23 countries, initiated multilateral negotiations to reduce trade barriers, culminating in eight rounds that progressively lowered average tariffs from around 40% in the late 1940s to about 5% by the 1990s.[146] This framework evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO) on January 1, 1995, with 164 member states as of 2023, overseeing global trade rules, resolving disputes, and binding governments to non-discriminatory trade practices under agreements like GATT for goods and GATS for services.[147] The WTO's dispute settlement mechanism has adjudicated over 600 cases since inception, enforcing liberalization and reducing protectionism, though consensus-based decision-making has stalled new rounds like Doha since 2001.[148] Regional treaties have complemented multilateral efforts, such as the European Economic Community formed by the 1957 Treaty of Rome, which evolved into the European Union (EU) with a single market eliminating internal tariffs and harmonizing regulations, accounting for about 16% of global trade.[149] Other agreements, including the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) effective 1994, expanded to USMCA in 2020, have integrated regional supply chains while sparking debates over labor and environmental standards.[150] These instruments have empirically boosted trade volumes, with WTO members handling 98% of global trade, yet critics argue they impose conditions that constrain national policy autonomy, particularly on developing nations through IMF structural adjustment programs.[151][152] Concerns over sovereignty persist, as WTO rulings can override domestic laws deemed trade-distorting, though proponents counter that members voluntarily accept these rules to gain reciprocal market access, with empirical evidence showing net trade gains outweighing adjustment costs in most cases.[153] Governance imbalances, where voting power in IMF and World Bank favors advanced economies (e.g., U.S. veto power via 15%+ quota share), fuel accusations of favoring creditor interests over borrowers, contributing to uneven globalization benefits.[152] Despite reforms like increased developing country quotas since the 2010s, such structures reflect post-war power realities rather than equitable representation.[154]
Sovereignty Erosion and Nationalist Responses
Globalization entails the delegation of authority to supranational bodies and international treaties, which diminish national sovereignty by subordinating domestic decision-making to collective rules enforceable by external dispute mechanisms. The European Union exemplifies this process, originating from the 1957 Treaty of Rome that established supranational oversight of coal and steel, evolving into broader integration via the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, which created a common currency and foreign policy framework binding member states' autonomy in monetary and legislative spheres.[155][156] The European Court of Justice has upheld the primacy of EU law over national constitutions since the 1964 Costa v ENEL ruling, compelling governments to align policies or face penalties, as evidenced by fines imposed on states resisting migration quotas during the 2015-2016 crisis.[157] The World Trade Organization (WTO), founded in 1995, further illustrates sovereignty constraints through its dispute settlement system, which has ruled against national measures in over 600 cases by 2023, including U.S. challenges to dolphin-safe tuna labeling in 2012 and India's solar panel preferences in 2016, forcing policy reversals to comply with global trade norms.[158] Critics argue this mechanism effectively vetoes domestic protections, as nations risk trade sanctions for non-compliance, though defenders contend it preserves voluntary commitments without net sovereignty loss.[153] Similarly, International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout conditions during sovereign debt crises, such as Greece's 2010-2018 programs requiring austerity and privatization, have overridden fiscal sovereignty, with GDP contracting 25% under enforced reforms.[159] These dynamics have provoked nationalist backlashes framing globalization as an elite-driven transfer of power from electorates to unaccountable bureaucracies. The United Kingdom's Brexit referendum on June 23, 2016, passed with 51.9% support for departure from the EU, driven by campaigns emphasizing regained control over immigration, laws, and trade tariffs, culminating in formal exit on January 31, 2020.[160] In the United States, Donald Trump's November 2016 election victory, securing 304 electoral votes, hinged on promises to renegotiate deals like NAFTA—replaced by USMCA in 2020—and withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, portraying them as sovereignty-surrendering pacts that offshored jobs and authority.[160][161] European nationalist parties have similarly capitalized on sovereignty grievances, with France's National Rally under Marine Le Pen advancing anti-EU platforms that secured 41.5% in the 2022 presidential runoff, advocating Frexit and border controls against perceived supranational overreach in migration and economic policy.[162] Italy's Brothers of Italy, led by Giorgia Meloni, won 26% of the vote in the September 2022 elections, pledging to curb EU-imposed fiscal rules and prioritize national identity amid globalization's cultural dilutions. These movements, echoing broader populist surges, have influenced policy reversals, such as the U.S. imposing 25% tariffs on steel imports in 2018, signaling a partial retreat from unfettered integration.[163][161]Global Governance and Policy Coordination
Global governance encompasses the network of international institutions and mechanisms designed to coordinate policies across sovereign states in response to globalization's transnational challenges, such as trade disputes, financial instability, and security threats.[164] These structures aim to promote cooperation, establish norms, and resolve conflicts without supranational authority, relying instead on voluntary compliance and consensus.[165] The United Nations (UN) serves as the primary forum, with its General Assembly functioning as the main deliberative body comprising all 193 member states to discuss and recommend on global issues, approve the UN budget, and appoint key officials like the Secretary-General.[166] Economic policy coordination is facilitated by Bretton Woods institutions established in 1944, including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for macroeconomic stability and financial crisis management, and the World Bank for long-term development and poverty reduction through loans and technical assistance.[50] [167] The World Trade Organization (WTO), founded in 1995 with 164 members, oversees global trade rules and has handled 642 disputes since inception, resolving over 350 through its binding settlement mechanism that emphasizes multilateral adjudication over unilateral actions.[168] Achievements include the WTO's role in liberalizing trade via agreements like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) successors, and the UN's adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, which has influenced domestic laws worldwide despite lacking enforcement.[169] Coordination faces inherent challenges from national sovereignty, where states prioritize domestic interests over collective action, leading to asymmetries in power and commitment—larger economies often dominate outcomes while smaller ones struggle for influence.[170] Enforcement remains weak; UN General Assembly resolutions are non-binding, and veto powers in the Security Council have stalled responses to conflicts, as critiqued in reports highlighting excessive consensus-seeking over decisive policy.[171] The WTO's appellate body has been paralyzed since 2019 due to U.S. blocks on judge appointments, leaving over 50 appeals in limbo and undermining dispute resolution amid rising protectionism.[172] Geopolitical tensions exacerbate fragmentation, with differing regulatory priorities hindering unified action on issues like climate and pandemics, often resulting in parallel forums or bilateral deals rather than comprehensive global pacts.[173] Critics, including from think tanks, argue that these institutions reflect post-World War II power structures ill-suited to multipolar realities, fostering inefficiency and selective adherence by major powers.[174]
Technological and Informational Dimensions
Technological Enablers
Advancements in maritime and rail transportation during the 19th century significantly facilitated the initial phases of modern globalization by reducing transit times and costs for goods and people. Steamships, powered by coal-fired engines and iron hulls, supplanted sailing vessels, enabling reliable transoceanic voyages independent of wind patterns; by the 1870s, regular steamship services connected Europe, North America, and Asia, contributing to a surge in international trade volumes that grew at an average annual rate of 3.4% from 1870 to 1913.[175] Railroads complemented this by linking inland production centers to ports, with networks expanding rapidly—Europe's rail mileage increased from 3,500 km in 1840 to over 200,000 km by 1910—lowering freight costs by up to 80% on key routes and integrating distant markets.[36] In the mid-20th century, containerization emerged as a pivotal innovation in shipping logistics, standardizing cargo handling and slashing loading times from days to hours while cutting costs by 90% per ton-mile compared to break-bulk methods. Introduced commercially in 1956 by American trucking magnate Malcolm McLean, who transported the first containerized load from Newark to Houston, this system spurred the growth of dedicated container ports and fleets, with global container trade volume expanding from negligible levels in the 1960s to over 100 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units) by the 1980s, directly fueling the post-war trade boom.[176] [177] Concurrently, the advent of commercial jet aviation in the 1950s, exemplified by the de Havilland Comet's entry into service in 1952 and Boeing 707's in 1958, compressed intercontinental travel from weeks to hours, boosting business travel, tourism, and the shipment of high-value perishables; air cargo tonnage worldwide rose from 100,000 tons in 1950 to 2.5 million tons by 1970, integrating time-sensitive supply chains.[178] Telecommunications technologies provided the informational backbone for coordinating global economic activities, beginning with the electric telegraph, which by 1866 linked Europe and North America via transatlantic cable, transmitting messages at speeds of 10-20 words per minute and enabling near-real-time arbitrage in commodities markets.[179] The telephone, patented by Alexander Graham Bell in 1876, extended this to voice communication, with international subscriber trunk dialing introduced in 1952 between the U.S. and Canada, further accelerating cross-border business coordination.[180] The internet's commercialization in the 1990s, building on ARPANET protocols from 1969 and the World Wide Web's public debut in 1991, drastically lowered communication barriers, with global internet users growing from 16 million in 1995 to over 1 billion by 2005, facilitating instantaneous data exchange essential for just-in-time manufacturing and e-commerce platforms that handled $26 trillion in cross-border trade by 2018.[181] These enablers collectively diminished the "tyranny of distance," allowing firms to fragment production across borders while maintaining oversight, though their benefits were unevenly distributed due to infrastructure dependencies in developing regions.[182]Digital and Information Flows
Digital and information flows represent a core mechanism of contemporary globalization, facilitating the instantaneous transmission of data, knowledge, and communications across national boundaries via the internet and telecommunications infrastructure. Over 95% of intercontinental data traffic relies on submarine fiber-optic cables laid on the ocean floor, which connect continents and enable the bulk of global digital exchanges.[183][184] These cables transmit multiple terabits of data per second, underpinning services from e-commerce to cloud computing.[185] As of early 2025, approximately 5.56 billion individuals worldwide, or 67.9% of the global population, access the internet, marking a substantial increase from prior decades and accelerating cross-border information sharing.[186] International data flows have surged, with global digital trade exports reaching $7.23 trillion in 2024, reflecting a 12% annual growth rate and surpassing traditional goods trade in certain value metrics.[187] This expansion includes digitally deliverable services valued at $4.64 trillion, driven by sectors like software, media, and financial services.[188] The proliferation of these flows has enhanced globalization by disseminating knowledge and technology, contributing to productivity gains and economic integration; for instance, digital globalization has boosted international information exchanges by up to 47% during periods of physical restriction, such as the 2020 lockdowns.[189] However, disparities persist, with developing regions exhibiting lower internet penetration, limiting equitable participation in global networks.[190] Overall, global data volume reached 149 zettabytes in 2024, underscoring the scale of information circulation that fuels innovation and trade but also raises concerns over data sovereignty and cybersecurity.[191]Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Networks
Knowledge transfer in the context of globalization refers to the diffusion of technological, managerial, and scientific know-how across national borders, primarily facilitated by foreign direct investment (FDI), international trade, skilled labor mobility, and collaborative research efforts.[192] Multinational enterprises (MNEs) play a central role by establishing subsidiaries that embed advanced practices in host economies, enabling local firms to learn through observation, hiring, and supply chain interactions. Empirical studies indicate that such transfers generate productivity spillovers, with host country firms experiencing gains from backward linkages to foreign affiliates, though forward spillovers are less consistent.[193] These effects are contingent on the absorptive capacity of domestic entities, including their human capital and R&D investments, explaining variations across regions and sectors.[194] Innovation networks emerge as interconnected webs of R&D activities spanning countries, often measured through co-patenting and cross-border citations, which signal knowledge flows. Analysis of patent data reveals that international collaborations have intensified, with global R&D expenditure growth slowing to 2.9% in 2024 amid geopolitical tensions, yet networks continue to drive technological advancement.[195] For instance, cross-border patent citations have increased, particularly in fields like robotics and 5G, where citations from distant origins reflect assimilated foreign innovations, though geographic proximity still influences flow intensity.[196] Firm-level evidence from FDI shows that exposure to foreign investors boosts local innovation, especially in knowledge-using phases, with spillovers stronger in emerging economies capable of reverse-engineering or adapting imported technologies.[197] Despite these benefits, evidence on knowledge spillovers remains mixed, with some studies finding neutral or negative intra-industry effects due to competition or weak local capabilities.[198] Global value chains amplify networks by distributing R&D tasks, as seen in patent cooperation data from 2007–2021 across 50 economies, where embedded positions in innovation graphs correlate with upgraded technological status.[199] Overall, these mechanisms underscore globalization's role in accelerating cumulative innovation, though outcomes depend on institutional quality and policy frameworks that protect intellectual property while fostering diffusion.[200]Measurement and Indicators
Globalization Indices
Globalization indices compile and standardize diverse empirical indicators to assess the extent of cross-border integration, enabling cross-country and temporal comparisons of globalization's progression. These metrics draw from verifiable data sources such as trade volumes from the World Bank, foreign direct investment (FDI) statistics from UNCTAD, and international organization memberships from the Union of International Associations, aggregating them into composite scores that capture multifaceted dimensions of interconnectedness.[201][202] The KOF Globalisation Index, originating in 2002 from the KOF Swiss Economic Institute at ETH Zurich and revised in 2018, stands as the preeminent contemporary measure, covering 195 countries from 1970 onward with 43 variables weighted via principal component analysis on a 0–100 scale, where higher scores denote greater globalization. Its economic dimension (43% weight) incorporates de facto flows like trade openness (exports plus imports as percentage of GDP) and FDI stocks, alongside de jure restrictions such as tariff barriers; the social dimension (36% weight) tracks personal contacts (e.g., international tourist arrivals per capita), information flows (e.g., international internet bandwidth), and cultural indicators (e.g., number of McDonald's restaurants per capita); the political dimension (21% weight) evaluates embassy numbers in a country, participation in intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), and international treaty ratifications. The index distinguishes between actual flows (de facto) and enabling policies (de jure) to reflect both outcomes and institutional frameworks.[202][201] The 2024 KOF update, analyzing data through 2022, records global overall globalization rebounding toward pre-2019 peaks at an average of approximately 60.8, propelled by robust economic recovery in goods and services trade post-COVID restrictions, though financial globalization dipped due to reduced FDI and portfolio investments relative to GDP, social ties showed partial tourism resurgence but lagged in cultural exchanges, and political globalization flatlined amid rising geopolitical frictions like trade wars and reduced multilateral cooperation. Top performers included the Netherlands at 89.72 (bolstered by Rotterdam's port dominance), Switzerland at 89.58 (excelling in pharmaceutical exports and hosting bodies like the World Health Organization), and Belgium at 88.90 (via EU integration and Brussels' diplomatic density), while larger economies like the United States ranked lower due to relatively lower trade openness. Russia's score plummeted post-2022 invasion sanctions, severing FDI inflows and IGO ties. Projections for 2023 suggest moderated trade gains offset by inflation and conflicts.[203][204] Preceding efforts include the A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalization Index, launched in 2001 and published through 2006 across 62–84 countries, which parsed integration into economic integration (trade and FDI flows), personal contacts (international travel and remittances), technological connectivity (internet users and secure servers), and political engagement (treaties and peacekeeping), yielding rankings where small states like Singapore often led. The Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI), developed around 2006 and last substantially updated to 2012 data across 117 countries, innovated by adding an ecological dimension via export/import ecological footprints alongside economic, socio-cultural, and political pillars, though its sporadic revisions limit ongoing utility.[205][206] Despite their data rigor, globalization indices face methodological critiques: small, trade-dependent economies systematically rank higher, potentially inflating openness scores unrelated to scale; cultural proxies like fast-food prevalence may proxy Westernization over universal integration, embedding ethnocentric biases; and sensitivity to variable selection or aggregation (e.g., principal components versus equal weighting) can shift rankings by up to 20 positions, as robustness tests on the Kearney index demonstrate. These issues underscore that while indices track observable trends empirically, they approximate complex causal processes and warrant caution in inferring policy causality without disaggregated analysis. Academic origins like KOF's, grounded in peer-reviewed revisions and transparent data, enhance reliability over less formalized measures, yet no index fully escapes aggregation trade-offs inherent to multidimensional quantification.[207][208][202]Economic and Trade Metrics
Economic globalization is quantified through metrics such as trade openness, foreign direct investment (FDI) flows, and tariff levels, which capture the integration of national economies via cross-border exchanges of goods, services, and capital. Trade openness, measured as the ratio of total trade (exports plus imports) to gross domestic product (GDP), serves as a primary indicator; globally, this ratio rose from approximately 24% in 1950 to a peak of around 61% in 2008, reflecting expanded international commerce post-World War II, before stabilizing near 57% in 2021 amid supply chain disruptions and geopolitical tensions.[209][210] FDI inflows, representing long-term investments establishing production facilities abroad, provide another key measure; global FDI reached $1.6 trillion in 2021, equivalent to about 1.7% of world GDP, but declined to $1.5 trillion in 2024—a 11% drop from the prior year—due to economic uncertainty, higher interest rates, and policy shifts toward protectionism.[77][84] Data from UNCTAD, an agency under the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, tracks these flows, though estimates can vary with methodological adjustments for conduit economies that inflate headline figures.[211] Tariff reductions further illustrate trade liberalization; under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and subsequent World Trade Organization (WTO) rounds, simple average most-favored-nation (MFN) applied tariffs for industrial products fell from over 40% in 1947 to around 3-5% by the early 2000s, with global weighted averages hovering at 7-9% in recent years despite rising non-tariff barriers.[212][213] These metrics, drawn from institutions like the World Bank and WTO, underscore globalization's expansion but also highlight reversals, as evidenced by a post-2018 uptick in trade-restrictive measures exceeding 3,000 annually.[65]| Year | Global Trade (% of GDP) | Global FDI Inflows (Trillion USD) | Avg. MFN Tariff (All Products, %) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1950 | ~24 | N/A | ~40 (1947 baseline) |
| 2000 | ~51 | ~1.4 | ~7 |
| 2008 | ~61 | ~1.7 | ~5-7 |
| 2021 | ~57 | ~1.6 | ~7-9 |
| 2024 | ~56.6 | ~1.5 | ~7-9 |
Social and Cultural Measures
Social globalization is quantified through metrics assessing cross-border personal interactions, information dissemination, and cultural exchanges, often aggregated in composite indices like the KOF Globalisation Index's social dimension. This dimension encompasses subindices for personal contacts—including the percentage of foreign population, international tourism inflows, and outbound telephone traffic—information flows such as the proportion of internet users and trade in newspapers, and cultural proximity measured by trade in books and participation in international sports events.[201] The index normalizes these variables relative to maximum values and weights them to produce country scores, revealing a steady rise in social globalization since the 1970s, with a temporary dip during the COVID-19 pandemic before approaching pre-2020 levels by 2023.[203] Key empirical indicators include international migration stocks, which stood at 304 million people in mid-2024, equivalent to 3.7% of the world's population, compared to 2.9% in 1990, signaling increased human mobility facilitated by reduced transportation costs and policy liberalizations.[215][216] International tourism arrivals provide another direct measure of temporary personal contacts, totaling 1.4 billion in 2024, surpassing 2019 pre-pandemic figures by approximately 2% and reflecting enhanced global connectivity despite geopolitical tensions.[217] Cultural measures focus on the diffusion of ideas, media, and artifacts across borders. Trade in cultural goods, as tracked by UNESCO, reached $212.8 billion globally in 2013, doubling from 2004 levels, with audiovisual and interactive media comprising over half the value and developing economies boosting their export shares from 32% to 44%.[218] Complementary metrics include the penetration of global media; for instance, internet users worldwide exceeded 5.3 billion by 2023, enabling unprecedented flows of cultural content, while the presence of multinational cultural outlets—such as the over 39,000 McDonald's restaurants in more than 100 countries by 2023—serves as a proxy for standardized cultural consumption patterns.[219] These indicators collectively demonstrate expanding cultural interconnectivity, though they may overlook local adaptations or resistance to homogenization.Empirical Benefits and Achievements
Poverty Alleviation and Economic Growth
Global extreme poverty, defined as living below $2.15 per day in 2017 purchasing power parity terms, declined from 38 percent of the world's population in 1990—affecting around 2 billion people—to about 9 percent by 2023, equivalent to roughly 700 million individuals.[220][221] This reduction, which lifted over 1.1 billion people out of poverty, occurred predominantly in East and South Asia, where economies integrated into global trade through export-oriented industrialization and foreign direct investment.[222] Empirical analyses attribute much of this progress to globalization's facilitation of market access, technology transfer, and capital inflows, which boosted incomes in labor-intensive sectors.[223][3] In China, the 1978 shift from central planning to market-oriented reforms, including openness to international trade and investment, drove annual per capita GDP growth of 8.2 percent from 1978 to 2020, alongside a poverty rate drop of 2.3 percentage points per year.[224] Rural poverty specifically fell from 31 percent of the population in 1978 to 3 percent by 2000, with over 800 million Chinese escaping extreme poverty by 2021 through manufacturing exports and urbanization fueled by global supply chains.[225][226] These outcomes stemmed from causal mechanisms like comparative advantage in low-wage assembly, where trade openness expanded employment opportunities absent under prior isolation.[227] India's 1991 economic liberalization, which dismantled trade barriers and encouraged foreign investment, accelerated poverty reduction threefold compared to prior decades, with the proportionate decline in poverty headcount intensifying post-reforms.[228] This period saw average annual GDP growth exceed 6 percent, lifting hundreds of millions from poverty via services exports, information technology booms, and agricultural productivity gains from global markets.[229] Studies confirm that districts more exposed to tariff reductions experienced faster poverty declines due to reallocation toward efficient sectors, though gains were uneven without complementary domestic policies.[230] Cross-country evidence reinforces these patterns: trade openness correlates with higher GDP growth in developing nations, particularly those with abundant unskilled labor, as integration into global value chains raises productivity and wages.[231][3] For instance, developing economies' intra-trade surged at 9.7 percent annually from 1995 onward, comprising nearly one-quarter of global trade by 2022 and underpinning broad-based income rises.[231] While institutional factors like property rights influenced outcomes, the empirical record—drawn from World Bank and WTO datasets—indicates globalization's net positive role in poverty alleviation over protectionist alternatives.[223][232]Productivity and Innovation Gains
Globalization has facilitated productivity gains primarily through expanded trade openness, which enables economies to specialize according to comparative advantages, fostering efficiency and resource allocation improvements. Empirical cross-country analyses indicate that more open economies exhibit higher total factor productivity (TFP) growth rates compared to relatively closed ones, with trade liberalization contributing to reallocation of resources toward more productive sectors and firms.[233] For instance, studies of firm-level responses to tariff reductions show that import competition and export access lead to within-firm productivity enhancements via process improvements and scale economies, with average TFP increases of 1-2% per year in liberalizing industries across multiple countries.[234] Foreign direct investment (FDI) further amplifies these effects by introducing advanced technologies and management practices, generating spillovers that elevate host-country productivity; meta-analyses confirm positive aggregate TFP impacts, particularly in manufacturing sectors of developing economies receiving greenfield FDI.[235][236] Innovation benefits arise from accelerated knowledge diffusion and collaborative networks enabled by global integration, allowing firms to access diverse ideas and R&D inputs beyond domestic boundaries. Globalization intensifies cross-border technology transfers, with multinational enterprises and global value chains serving as conduits for emerging technologies, evidenced by faster adoption rates in integrated economies—such as a 20-30% higher probability of technology uptake in countries with dense FDI and trade links.[237][182] Empirical evidence from patent data and innovation surveys links trade openness to increased R&D spillovers, where exposure to international markets boosts firm-level innovation outputs by enhancing access to foreign knowledge stocks and competitive pressures that incentivize novel problem-solving.[238] In host countries, FDI-driven technology diffusion has been associated with sustained TFP growth accelerations, as local firms imitate or adapt imported innovations, contributing to broader economic dynamism without relying solely on endogenous invention.[239] These gains are not uniform, often requiring complementary domestic policies like education and infrastructure to maximize spillovers, but the net causal evidence from instrumental variable approaches and natural experiments—such as unilateral tariff cuts—supports globalization's role in elevating long-run productivity and innovation trajectories over autarkic alternatives.[240][241]Health and Human Development Advances
Globalization has contributed to substantial improvements in human health outcomes by enabling the rapid diffusion of medical technologies, pharmaceuticals, and knowledge across borders, alongside increased access to foreign direct investment (FDI) and trade that fund health infrastructure in developing regions. Empirical analyses indicate that economic globalization, measured by trade openness and FDI inflows, exerts a positive effect on life expectancy, with panel data from multiple countries showing robust correlations after controlling for other factors. For instance, a study of 68 countries from 1972 to 2002 found that economic integration significantly boosts longevity, independent of political or social globalization dimensions. Similarly, trade openness has been linked to enhanced human development indices (HDI), which incorporate health metrics like life expectancy, through mechanisms such as technology transfer and income growth from exports.[242][243] Child and infant mortality rates have declined dramatically worldwide, with globalization playing a causal role via FDI-driven health investments and the global spread of interventions like vaccinations. The global under-five mortality rate fell from 94 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1990 to 37 in 2023, a 61% reduction, attributable in part to economic openness that facilitates access to affordable vaccines and medical supplies. Cross-country evidence from 117 nations confirms that globalization indices inversely correlate with infant and child mortality, as trade and investment introduce sanitation improvements, nutritional supplements, and disease control programs. Inward FDI stocks, a key globalization channel, reduce child mortality in less-developed countries by enabling local adoption of advanced pediatric care and infrastructure.[244][245][246] The international dissemination of vaccines exemplifies globalization's health benefits, with coordinated efforts averting an estimated 154 million deaths over the past 50 years through cross-border manufacturing, distribution, and epidemiological data sharing. Programs like the Expanded Programme on Immunization, supported by global trade in biologics, have curbed diseases such as measles and polio, disproportionately benefiting low-income regions via technology transfers from multinational firms. On nutrition, global food trade has enhanced dietary diversity and reduced micronutrient deficiencies; imports of fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts via international networks have lowered dietary risk factors for non-communicable diseases in importing countries, particularly in middle-income economies. These gains stem from supply chain efficiencies that stabilize prices and broaden access to year-round produce, countering local seasonal shortages.[247][248][249]Criticisms and Challenges
Labor Market Disruptions and Inequality Claims
Critics of globalization contend that expanded international trade and offshoring have disrupted labor markets in developed economies by displacing manufacturing jobs and suppressing wages for low-skilled workers. Empirical studies, such as the "China shock" analysis by Autor, Dorn, and Hanson, estimate that increased Chinese imports to the United States between 1999 and 2011 resulted in the loss of approximately 1 million manufacturing jobs and 2.4 million total jobs, with effects concentrated in regions exposed to import competition from labor-intensive sectors like textiles and furniture. These disruptions led to elevated job churning, persistent local unemployment rates up to 0.8 percentage points higher than unaffected areas, and reduced lifetime earnings for displaced workers, as reemployment often occurred in lower-wage service roles rather than equivalent manufacturing positions.[250][251][252] Such labor market adjustments reflect causal mechanisms where import competition erodes demand for domestic production in tradable sectors, prompting worker relocation that is slowed by geographic frictions and skill mismatches. Research indicates that while aggregate U.S. employment recovered over time through expansion in non-tradable sectors, exposed communities experienced slower recovery, with manufacturing employment declining by about 59% of total losses from 2001 to 2019 attributable to this shock. Similar patterns appear in other developed nations, where globalization correlates with deindustrialization; for instance, European studies link trade openness to higher unemployment among unskilled males, though national-level policies like retraining mitigate some effects.[253][254] Claims of globalization exacerbating income inequality within developed countries often cite rising wage gaps between skilled and unskilled labor, driven by skill-biased technological change amplified by trade. Data from advanced economies show that the college wage premium increased by 10-20% in the U.S. from the 1980s to 2000s, partly due to offshoring of routine tasks, which depressed wages for non-college-educated workers by up to 5-10% in exposed industries. Proponents of these views, including economists like Joseph Stiglitz, argue that financial globalization channels exacerbate inequality more than trade alone, with capital flows favoring high-skilled sectors. However, econometric analyses reveal trade's role as modest compared to automation and institutional factors; for example, a WTO review finds no strong link between offshoring and wage stagnation in the 1980s, when production fragmentation was nascent.[255][256][10][257] Globally, these disruption claims overlook countervailing evidence of poverty reduction and aggregate gains. World Bank data document that the proportion of the developing world's population living below $1 per day halved from 42% in 1981 to 21% by 2002, coinciding with trade liberalization, while global interpersonal inequality declined as billions entered middle-income brackets via export-led growth in Asia. Within-country inequality rose in some OECD nations (Gini coefficients up 2-5 points since 1980), but this reflects domestic policies and technology more than trade; cross-country panels show globalization reducing inequality in developing states through job creation. Adjustment assistance programs, such as U.S. Trade Adjustment Assistance, have covered only a fraction of displaced workers, highlighting policy failures in facilitating transitions rather than inherent flaws in globalization itself.[258][259][260]Environmental and Resource Strain
Globalization has intensified environmental strain by amplifying the scale of international trade, production relocation, and resource extraction to meet rising global demand, leading to higher greenhouse gas emissions and habitat loss. Empirical analyses indicate that economic globalization correlates with elevated CO2 emissions, particularly in high-income countries where resource-intensive activities are outsourced. For instance, international trade accounts for approximately 20-30% of global CO2 emissions, encompassing emissions from transportation and embodied in traded goods. Shipping alone, a cornerstone of global supply chains, saw emissions projected to rise by up to 240% in baseline scenarios without mitigation, driven by expanded volumes of containerized freight since the 1990s.[261][262][263] Resource depletion has accelerated as global supply chains prioritize efficiency and cost, drawing on finite materials like metals, water, and timber across borders. Between 2001 and 2015, agricultural expansion tied to export commodities contributed to the conversion of 45.1 million hectares of forest to pasture, primarily for beef and soy production in regions like Latin America. High-income nations, importing these commodities, effectively drove 40% of global deforestation during this period, embodying land-use pressures in their consumption patterns. Similarly, global natural resource use is forecasted to surge 60% by 2060 relative to 2020 levels, exacerbating scarcity in water, energy, and minerals due to just-in-time manufacturing and offshoring.[264][265][266] The pollution haven hypothesis posits that lax regulations in developing countries attract polluting industries from stricter jurisdictions, displacing emissions without net global reduction. Evidence from 2000-2014 across 43 countries and 56 industries supports this for CO2, SO2, and NOx, with foreign direct investment in low-regulation areas correlating to higher local emissions. However, countervailing effects like technology spillovers have yielded mixed outcomes, with some studies finding neutral or mitigating impacts from multinational operations in certain contexts. Waste generation, including e-waste from global electronics supply chains, further strains ecosystems, as rapid turnover in consumer goods leads to unmanaged disposal in export hubs.[267][268][269]Cultural Erosion and Identity Conflicts
Critics of globalization contend that intensified cross-cultural exchanges erode distinct local traditions and practices, fostering a homogenized global culture dominated by Western influences. Empirical analyses indicate that global media and consumer products marginalize indigenous customs, with studies documenting the decline of traditional festivals and artisanal crafts in regions exposed to multinational branding. For instance, the ubiquity of fast-food chains like McDonald's, operating over 39,000 locations worldwide by 2023, exemplifies how standardized consumption patterns supplant local culinary heritages in diverse settings from Asia to Eastern Europe.[270][271] A key manifestation of this erosion appears in linguistic diversity, where globalization accelerates the attrition of indigenous languages through the dominance of lingua francas like English in trade, education, and digital media. United Nations estimates project that more than half of the world's approximately 7,000 languages could vanish by 2100, with over 40% already endangered, particularly among indigenous communities facing economic pressures to adopt majority tongues for global integration. In mixed-language households influenced by migratory globalization, usage of native dialects drops sharply, from 38% in monolingual families to 16% in bilingual ones, underscoring causal links between cultural globalization and heritage loss.[272][273][274] These dynamics precipitate identity conflicts, as perceived threats to cultural sovereignty provoke nativist backlashes and populist mobilizations. Research demonstrates that globalization-induced cultural shocks, including mass migration and imported media norms, heighten identity-based resentments, correlating with surges in support for anti-globalist parties; for example, post-2008 economic integration amplified cultural anxieties in Europe and the U.S., contributing to electoral gains for figures emphasizing national heritage preservation. In developing nations, Western ideological diffusion clashes with traditional values, fueling movements resisting homogenization, such as India's cultural nationalism amid Bollywood's global hybridization. While some adaptation yields hybrid forms, evidence from affected locales reveals persistent tensions, with surveys showing heightened perceptions of identity dilution among youth in globalized urban centers.[275][276][277]