In Defense of Globalization
Globalization is a topic that has formed the basis of many debates because of its endless controversy about its effect on development issues. Those against globalization argue that it is an enemy of the development of man. Most critics view globalization from an economical perspective (Bhagwati, 2007). Globalization is abroad term, that is often defined as a myriad of phenomena, which is ultimately translated to mean, ‘’increase in the interdependence of countries’’ (Goldberg & Pavcnik, 2007, P. 41). Those who choose to embrace globalization are more likely to benefit from the opportunities that it provides compared to those who renounce it because of its alleged demerits to humanity. However, Bhagwati says that globalization has a human face, which is contrary to anti-globalizers who believe in the opposite. Bhagwati (2007) emphasizes that the main idea is maintaining the human faces of globalization through the management of forces that shape globalization. Those who oppose globalization take that side out of passion, instead of reason. Reason reveals that we reject the idea that globalization does not bear a human face. The argument is a false alarm, creating a delusion whereby globalization can only be analyzed from one point of view (Bhagwati, 2007). Globalization has a human face and those opposing this do not have substantial reason and only apply passion for fueling their anti-globalization campaigns. Globalization has the face of humanity and it would be clearer if people begin looking at other critical issues, like how it can be managed.
There is a different group, which views globalization as the highest level of capitalism in the modern times. Multinational organizations are purported as the main culprits since they continuously increase their global presence. It is challenging to engage in a dialogue with such groups because of their rigid perception, which describes them as hard-core critiques (Bhagwati, 2007). However, the new economic order that we have today after the cold war has actually been helpful in elevating millions of people from abject poverty because of the forces of globalization. Today, people are able to afford making savings, investments and even a guarantee of comfortable life in old age (Walker, 2007). Though there is a general view that these opportunities are only available to those living in the western states unlike those in Asia, Latin America or Sub-Saharan Africa, one cannot deny that there are several changes that are already taking place. In fact, recent trends show that in the next twenty years, growing economies like China will surpass the United States. Subsequently, after another ten to fifteen years, India will surpass both China and the US, combined with its teeming and ambitious population. What constituted the developed world in the 20th century, which is Japan, Europe and North America will soon contribute a third less of the economic output is used for production a few decades ago. The emerging markets are currently producing more than half of the global economic growth (Walker, 2007). Globalization has ensured economic development in nations that were not even close to a appearing in the list of the developed countries.
The emerging markets’ economic growth has been mainly attributed to the international diversification. Besides, investors have also pointed out the impressive growth of emerging economies as a primary motivator that increases their strategic distribution in their global equity portfolios among emerging markets. These emerging economies include the BRIC economies, Brazil, Russia, India and China (Vanguard Research, 2010). Globalization is linked to reduction in poverty and impressive economic performance, especially countries that have attained significant economic reforms (Kali & Reyes, 2006).
The graph below is an illustration that the percentage of economic growth of emerging countries is likely to increase in the next ten years.
There are those who oppose globalization and consider it as the main cause of the various social problems that are observed today, like poverty, especially in the deveeloping countries. Unlike hardocre critiques, one can reasion more with such a group of people. For example, one may state that globalization has not caused poverty but has elevated it to certain extent (Bhagwati, 2007). Besides, poverty and globalization are global aspects and there is still very little that is known concerning the lattter. This is atributed to the fact that there are still faced with the challenge of definition and measurement, making it easier for one to lose track of the underlying issue. Glopbalization is also a new phenomenon in the history of economics. This has subsequently resulted into the use of particular definitions and sources of data, which can impact distinct results that entail different policy implications. From an economical point of view, globalization is often translated to man liberalization of the market through the gradual decrease of the role of the state in the economy of a nation. All these attributes of globalization have an effect on poverty. There is a basic rationale that an opn market can enhance trade while trade contributes to the groth of an economy. Therefore, there is an implication that globalization helps in the lleeviation of poverty. However, there are still disagreements about this because the costs and venefits of trade are not equally distributed across consumers and producers of imported and exported goods.
Conversely, since the poor are the ones who are mostly affcted by infltion, it would be ideal for a country to export more in order to maintain its macroeconomic stability (Santarelli & Figini, 2006). Thus, globalization cannot be ditrectly blamed for the hike in the levels of poverty. Countries have to become innovatibe on how to cope with the forces of globalization by initiating sound reforms. Globalization is not the cause of poverty, instead, the management of forces that further influence globalization.
It is lso important to note that globalization is also often linked to sustainable development. There are critic who argue that globalization is the cause of environmental degradation (Bhagwati, 2007). Therefore, there are concerns on how sustainable it is. Human welfare and wellbeing has always encompassed our natural environment (Miller, 2005). Thus, any form of environmental degradation is not compatible with the weelbeing of man. However, it is up to the states to create strong environmental policies since it plays an integral part in the management of th natural resources (Miller, 2005). Countries haave to be more aggressive in pursuing policies that can enhnace the achievemnt of sustainable development. Gloing global cannot offer the guarantee that the world will become a better place but it certainly helps in attaining a high level of transparency and accountability. As nations gradually merge to forma global village, there is greater need for coming up with higher international standards (Washington Post, 2005).
Despite the many controversies surrounding globalization, one cannot absolutely deny that it has a human face. This is because it has proven to be benefitial to societies that were initially considered as marginalized. More people can be involved in trade and benefit inclusing farmers frrom developing nations. Globalization is not discriminative but fosters cooperation among stats as well as institutions. As the world joins into a global village, accountability and trnsparency is increased as multinational organiztions agree to form partnerships that nhnace man’s wweelbeing, whether it is in the form of employment or through corporate social responsibility. The human face that globalization bears can be further improved through proper management of global forces.
Bhagwati, J. (2007). In Defense of Globalization. New York: Oxford University press.
Goldberg, P. K., & Pavcnik, N. (2007). “Distributional Effects of Globalization of Globalization in Developing Countries”. Journal of Economic Literature” 45(1), 39-82
Kali, R., & Reyes, J. (2007). “The architecture of globalization: A network approach to international Economic Integration”. Journal of International Business Studies 38 pp. 595-620
Miller, C. (2005). “New Civic Epistemologies of Quantification: Making Sense of Indicators of Local and Global Sustainability.” Science Technology & Human Values 30 (3), 403-432
Santarelli, E., & Figini, P. (2006). “Openess, Economic Reforms, and Poverty: Globalization in Developing Countries”. The Journal of Developing Areas 39 (2), 129-151
Vanguard Research. (2010). “Investing in Emerging Market: Evaluating the Allure of Rapid Economic Growth”. Retrieved 5th March, 2014 from: http://www.vanguard.com/pdf/icriem.pdf
Walker, M. (2007). “Globalization 3.0.” The Wilson Quarterly 31(4), 16-24
Washington post. (2005). “Measuring Globalization: the Global Top 20”. Retrieved 5th March 2014 from: http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp