Globalization or globalisation is the process of interaction and integration

between people, companies, and governments worldwide. Globalization has

grown due to advances in transportation and communication technology. With
increased global interactions comes the growth of international trade, ideas,
and culture. Globalization is primarily an economic process of interaction and
integration that's associated with social and cultural aspects.
However, conflicts and diplomacy are also large parts of the history of
globalization, and modern globalization.

Economically, globalization involves goods and services, and the economic

resources of capital, technology, and data.[1][2] The steam
locomotive, steamship, jet engine, and container ships are some of the
advances in the means of transport while the rise of the telegraph and its
modern offspring, the Internet and mobile phones show development
in telecommunications infrastructure. All of these improvements have been
major factors in globalization and have generated
further interdependence of economic and cultural activities around the globe.[3]
[4][5]

Though many scholars place the origins of globalization in modern times,

others trace its history long before the European Age of Discovery and voyages
to the New World, some even to the third millennium BC.[6][7] Large-scale
globalization began in the 1820s.[8] In the late 19th century and early 20th century,
the connectivity of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. The
term globalization is recent, only establishing its current meaning in the 1970s. [9]

In 2000, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identified four basic aspects of
globalization: trade and transactions, capital and investment movements, migr
ation and movement of people, and the dissemination of knowledge.[10] Further,
environmental challenges such as global warming, cross-boundary water, air
pollution, and over-fishing of the ocean are linked with globalization.
[11]
Globalizing processes affect and are affected
by business and work organization, economics, socio-cultural resources, and
the natural environment. Academic literature commonly subdivides globalization
into three major areas: economic globalization, cultural globalization,
and political globalization.[12]

Definition of Globalisation

The concept of globalisation has been argued to have no distinct definition,

is challenging to distinguish and has often been used ambiguously. The
term has a ‘theoretical construct that is itself contested and open for
various meanings and inflections’ (Kellner, 1997:25). The meaning of
globalisation is dependent on the context in which it is used. It has been
argued to be ‘a prominent topic among geographers and sociologists as
well as economists and political scientists, and is studied within every
paradigm, from neo-classical economics to post-modern social theory to
realist international relations theory to Marxism’ (Radice, 2000: 6, cited in
Sudgen and Wilson, 2005:15). Globalisation includes distinct phrases such
as global culture, free trade, internationalization and interdependence.
According to Mursheed (2001:1) ‘the term is employed in the enumerative
sense to define a reaction to increased integration, and the policies that
follow from there’.

On the other hand, Held and McGrew (1999) portrays globalization through
the use of four main changes, primarily, it encompasses the eradication of
borders as a result of economic, social, and political behaviour. The
subsequent characteristic contains the growth of links between culture,
trade flows and investment. The third characteristic is the intensification of
the combination of consumer preference, ideas, goods, information, capital
and people. The last characteristic comprises of the prospective global
impact that local developments have on other economies, perhaps
resulting in global consequences. Held and McGrew further argue that
these are the characteristics that illustrate globalization as remarkably fluid.
Theoretical perspectives on globalisation

The concept of globalisation has provoked much disagreement and

discussions about its benefits and conceptualization. There are two schools
of thought that argue two extreme accounts of globalization and its impact.
These are referred to as the hyper-globalists and the sceptics. Both views
provide a distinct perspective on this topic. Hyperglobalists generally recognize
the globalization phenomenon as an element with positive economic, social
and political outcomes. Globalisation is considered a process which involves
interconnectedness and shapes global integration. According to Ohmae
(1995), globalisation represents a new phenomenon whereby international
law has predetermined the conclusion of the nation-state. Optimists
promote the idea that globalisation established a single global market
capable of managing itself. In contrast, sceptics’ argue that a discussion on
globalization condemns the characteristics of globalization supported by
the hyperglobalists (Hirst and Thomspon, 1999). Sceptics reject the notion
of a ‘new’ globalization and argue that globalisation is not unique and has
been a longstanding phenomenon. However, sceptics do not oppose
globalisation altogether but oppose it in its current form (Deadroff, 2003).
Stiglitz (2002) and Kellner (1997) argue that globalization creates
dissatisfaction, and is viewed as a new form of capitalism or imperialism
which inherently negatively affects tradition, culture and less developed
countries.

The sceptics’ perspective on globalisation

Having highlighted both extreme perspectives on globalisation, the

assignment will now focus on one main theoretical perspective chosen for
this particular assignment which is the sceptics’ perspective. The sceptics
argue that globalisation is ‘a necessary myth’ to conceal developed
countries and institutions goal of expanding neo liberal policies globally
(Held et al, 1999). They assume that globalisation is a tool used by those in
power such as America and Europe to dominate what happens in the world.
However, Sceptics ‘do not presuppose a desire to eliminate globalisation…
but…agree that many aspects of it is awful’ (Deardroff, 2003:643). For
example, sceptics argue that although globalisation benefits developed
economies it indirectly disadvantages less developed countries. In 1999 the
United Nations found that there were less than 20 less developed countries
that had positive gains as a result of globalisation (Shangquan, 2000). The
research illustrated that the difference of income per capita reported
between the richest countries and the poorest countries had increased from
30 times in 1960 and to 70 times in 2000. Consequently, the difference
signifies the magnitude to which globalisation benefits developing
countries, however, it is evident that developing countries do not benefit as
much as their developed counterparts. Therefore, globalisation is argued to
unfairly redistribute income, thereby increasing the wage discrepancies
between the skilled and unskilled labor force (Jenkins, 2006). This inevitably
creates societal and hierarchical disparities which inherently has an impact
on local culture.

In today’s global economy, everyone is accustomed to buying goods from

other countries—electronics from Taiwan, vegetables from Mexico, clothing
from China, cars from Korea, and skirts from India. Most modern shoppers
take the “Made in [a foreign country]” stickers on their products for
granted. Long-distance commerce wasn’t always this common, although
foreign trade—the movement of goods from one geographic region to
another—has been a key factor in human affairs since prehistoric times.
Thousands of years ago, merchants transported only the most precious
items—silk, gold and other precious metals and jewels, spices, porcelains,
and medicines—via ancient, extended land and sea trade routes, including
the famed Silk Road through central Asia. Moving goods great distances
was simply too hard and costly to waste the effort on ordinary products,
although people often carted grain and other foods over shorter distances
from farms to market towns.William J. Bernstein, A Splendid Exchange:
How Trade Shaped the World (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2008).
What is the globalization debate? Well, it’s not so much a debate as it is a
stark difference of opinion on how the internationalization of businesses is
affecting countries’ cultural, consumer, and national identities—and
whether these changes are desirable. For instance, the ubiquity of such food
purveyors as Coca-Cola and McDonald’s in practically every country
reflects the fact that some consumer tastes are converging, though at the
likely expense of local beverages and foods. Remember, globalization refers
to the shift toward a more interdependent and integrated global economy.
This shift is fueled largely by (1) declining trade and investment barriers
and (2) new technologies, such as the Internet. The globalization debate
surrounds whether and how fast markets are actually merging together.

In today’s global economy, everyone is accustomed to buying goods from

other countries—electronics from Taiwan, vegetables from Mexico, clothing
from China, cars from Korea, and skirts from India. Most modern shoppers
take the “Made in [a foreign country]” stickers on their products for
granted. Long-distance commerce wasn’t always this common, although
foreign trade—the movement of goods from one geographic region to
another—has been a key factor in human affairs since prehistoric times.
Thousands of years ago, merchants transported only the most precious
items—silk, gold and other precious metals and jewels, spices, porcelains,
and medicines—via ancient, extended land and sea trade routes, including
the famed Silk Road through central Asia. Moving goods great distances
was simply too hard and costly to waste the effort on ordinary products,
although people often carted grain and other foods over shorter distances
from farms to market towns.William J. Bernstein, A Splendid Exchange:
How Trade Shaped the World (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2008).

What is the globalization debate? Well, it’s not so much a debate as it is a

stark difference of opinion on how the internationalization of businesses is
affecting countries’ cultural, consumer, and national identities—and
whether these changes are desirable. For instance, the ubiquity of such food
purveyors as Coca-Cola and McDonald’s in practically every country
reflects the fact that some consumer tastes are converging, though at the
likely expense of local beverages and foods. Remember, globalization refers
to the shift toward a more interdependent and integrated global economy.
This shift is fueled largely by (1) declining trade and investment barriers
and (2) new technologies, such as the Internet. The globalization debate
surrounds whether and how fast markets are actually merging together.