The making of the physical products tends to be done in poorer countries, whereas the branding and marketing, tend to be done in the richer countries.
Where people in developing countries select aspects of western culture and adapt them to their particular needs — associated with Transformationalism and critical of the pessimist theory that globalisation results in Americanisation. Things becoming increasingly the same; in global terms, the erosion of local cultures and the emergence of one global mono-culture.
Where identities are increasingly a result of picking and mixing from different cultural traditions around the globe; implies more individual freedom to choose identity and greater diversity; associated with transformationalist theories of globalisation. The belief that globalisation is happening and that local cultures are being eroded primarily because of the expansion of international capitalism and the emergence of a homogenous global culture; believe that globalisation is a positive process characterised by economic growth, increasing prosperity and the spread of democracy.
A form of rationalisation through which the principles of efficiency and predictability come to dominate more and more spheres of social life. A set of right wing economic policies which reduce the power of governments and give more freedom to private enterprise — the three main neoliberal policies are deregulation, privatisation and lowering taxation. The process where the sovereignty of nation states is reduced due to the increasing power of International Institutions, such as the United Nations.
An economy in which the service sector generates more wealth than the manufacturing of physical products. A globalised society with the following characteristics: a technologically advanced, mainly post-industrial service sector economy, high levels of consumption, lots of individual freedom to shape identities through consumption, and correspondingly high levels of cultural diversity; media-saturation and hyperreality; high levels of insecurity and uncertainty.
Global social movements involve co-operation of people across national borders, and their aims may sometimes clash with those of some national governments. An optimist globalist who believes that the world wide adoption of neoliberal policies by governments have resulted in economic globalisation, more trade between nations and increasing prosperity for all.
A theory which holds that globalisation is a complex process involving a number of different two-way exchanges between global institutions and local cultures; it can be reversed and controlled. An international organization formed in to increase political and economic cooperation among member countries. The organization works on economic and social development programs, improving human rights and reducing global conflicts source: Investovepida.
You might like to test yourself on the above key terms using this Quizlet! Factors Contributing to Globalisation Giddens. What is Cultural Globalisation? What is Economic Globalisation? What is Political Globalisation? Transformationalists and postmodernists agree that the impact of globalization has been exaggerated by globalists but argue that it is foolish to reject the concept out of hand. This theoretical position argues that globalization should be understood as a complex set of interconnecting relationships through which power, for the most part, is exercised indirectly.
They suggest that the globalization process can be reversed, especially where it is negative or, at the very least, that it can be controlled. Transformationalists argue that the flow of culture is not one way, from the west to the developing world; it is a two-way exchange in which Western culture is also influenced, changed and enriched by cultures in the developing world.
Transformationlists and postmodernists also see the global media as beneficial because it is primarily responsible for diffusing different cultural styles around the world and creating new global hybrid styles in fashion, food, music, consumption and lifestyle. It is argued that in the global, postmodern world, such cultural diversity and pluralism will become the norm.
Postmodernists thus see globalization as a positive phenomenon because it has created a new class of global consumers, in both the developed and the developing world, with a greater range of choice from which they can construct a hybridised global identity.
Economically, politically and culturally globalists see transnational, global forces taking over from nations as the main sources of economy, sovereignty and identity. For some this means that social science has to move away from a methodological nationalism it is attached to, even from ideas of society to more cosmopolitan and global perspectives on social relations eg Beck ; Urry ; but see a response from Outhwaite Then, it is said by writers on the three waves, there was a more sober set of accounts that reacted against this with scepticism and argued that globalisation is not new and that probably the processes being described are not very global either eg Hirst and Thompson See also Krugman I will return to second and third wave perspectives in more detail throughout this article and wish to avoid repetition but an initial outline can be made here.
Sceptics are concerned with the abstract nature of globalist perspectives, which seem to be thin on empirical substantiation and make sweeping claims about processes as if they affect all areas of the world evenly and with the same responses. They see evidence of the continuing role of nation-states, both within their own boundaries and as agents of the transnational processes of globalisation, through which they maintain as much as lose power.
In the cases of the core, for instance in North America and Europe , states continue to be very powerful. National identities have a history and a hold on popular imagination that global identities cannot replace, evolving rather than being swept away, and there may even be evidence of a resurgence of nationalism as old nations come under challenge but from strongly held smaller nationalisms as much as from transnationalism eg see Smith ; Kennedy and Danks Sceptics have wanted to test the claims of globalism against evidence, and when they have done so have sometimes found it wanting.
They have also been concerned to see whether globalisation is received evenly and with the same response everywhere and, not surprisingly, have found signs of differentiation in its spread. Sceptics have tended to see the global economy as not globally inclusive.
For instance areas of sub-Saharan Africa are much less integrated than the powerhouses of East Asia, Europe and North America, with global inequality rising and protectionism still rife, for example in Europe and the USA in response to imports from growing Asian economies.
Whether globalisation or free trade, insofar as there really is free trade, is the answer to global poverty is questioned. Liberal policies and integration into the global economy may have helped some parts of the world, China , India and other parts of Asia for example. But in these places protectionism and state intervention may also have been an important part of the story, and other parts of the world, in Africa for example, have fallen prey to greater inequality and poverty while globalisation has progressed and are increasingly less likely to stand any chance in the open global economy which some see as the solution to their problems eg Rodrik ; Wolf and Wade ; Kaplinsky This suggests nation-states retain autonomy and sovereignty in many ways, and unevenly so see also Weiss Bodies like the UN seem to be as much inter-national as transnational, composed of nation-states and driven by them as much as above and beyond them.
Culturally it is said that nations may well respond to globalisation differently. Macdonalds may have proliferated around the world, but the ingredients vary to fit in with local customs from shrimp burgers in Japan to kosher burgers for Jewish customers , its consumers are more working class or middle class depending on location, and eating customs vary from fast to leisurely in different contexts.
From France to parts of the Middle-East not everyone responds positively to the globalisation of American culture. In fact a retreat to fundamentalism and greater rather than lesser nationalism are seen to be notable reactions to globalisation in some places Robins It is noteworthy too that it is the culture of one nation, America , that is often talked about in relation to cultural globalisation, as much as culture originating from all around the world Beck et al There have even been well known predictions of clashes of culture arising from globalisation, against hyper-globalist assumptions about the homogenisation or hybridisation of culture Barber ; Huntingdon However such clashes, insofar as they are real, may be to do with economic interest and foreign policy more than culture, and ideas of civilisational clashes often over-homogenise cultures and have the effect of demonising them and provoking clashes as much as accurately analysing the world.
Sceptics like Hirst and Thompson would not want to have too much to do with the suggestion of a clash of civilisations. Nevertheless such perspectives are amongst those which are sceptical about the growth of globalised culture. However there have been another set of reactions alongside and in response to the sceptic alternative to hyperglobalism. Economic interdependency, for instance, is seen as having grown significantly so that national economies are no longer contained within national territorial boundaries.
The outcome of this has been a departure from some of the conclusions of sceptics and instead a more complex picture of globalisation, in which globalisation is seen as occurring but without just sweeping all away before it, as hyper-globalists might have it see also Scholte The global nature of institutions such as finance, problems such as the environment, drugs and crime and developments in international communications and transport lead to more global political forms.
National economic, political and cultural forces are transformed and have to share their sovereignty with other entities of global governance and international law, as well as with mobile capital, multi-national corporations and global social movements but they are not removed. Globalisation may have a differentiated effect depending on type eg, economic, cultural or political or location where it is experienced, whilst still being a force.
Global inequality is seen as having moved from a simple core-periphery shape to more of a three tier structure including a middle group, without clear geographical demarcations because, for instance, the marginalised may live in the same cities as the elites eg Hoogvelt ; Bauman All of these involve both the continuation and transformation of existing structures, something in between what is described by sceptics and hyper-globalists.
With a recognition of uncertainty comes a recognition of the importance of agency in deciding what happens to globalisation rather than an assumption that it is predetermined or inevitable, as is suggested is the case in some first wave accounts Holton In short a third wave has emerged which is critical of hyperglobalism and wishes to formulate a more sophisticated picture but feels, contrary to scepticism, that globalisation is changing the world.
Third wave perspectives have been ones that do not go as far as the sceptics in that they do not deny that real significant changes have happened. They acknowledge the reality of globalising changes and so defend a globalist position but one that is modified to be more complex than that of the hyperglobalists.
To avoid repetition I will not dwell further just yet on the claims of the third wave. This article is focused on this third wave in globalisation theory and we will see more of its detailed claims on economy, politics and culture as the article proceeds.
The table below summarises the three waves or perspectives as they have been presented in the literature. The table presents images of the three waves. Individual contributors, including those cited above, do not always fit only into one wave, and, as we shall see, one wave presents itself in one way but when you look more closely at the details seems to actually reinforce one of the other waves it seeks to criticise.
What the reality is, is explored in the rest of this article. See also Held et al Table 1: Images of the Three Waves. Globalisation as causal. Globalisation is a discourse. Internationalisation as effect of other causes. Global transformations, but differentiation and embeddedness. Abstract, general approach. Empirical approach. Qualitative rather than quantitative approach. Global economy. Integration, open. Free trade. Inter-national economy. Triadic, regional, unequal.
State intervention and protectionism. Globally transformed. New stratification. Globalised but differentiated. Global governance or neo-liberalism. Decline of nation-state. Loss of national sovereignty. Nation-states, regional blocs, inter-national.
Power and inequality. Political agency possible. Politics globally transformed. Nation-states important but reconstructed.
Sovereignty shared. Clashes of culture. Complex, differentiated globalisation. Globalisation is new. Internationalisation is old. Globalisation old but present forms unprecedented. Normative politics. Global governance or neoliberalism.
End of social democratic welfare state. Reformist social democracy and international regulation possible. Cosmopolitan democracy. Nation-state, triad, conflicts, inequality. Uncertain, agency. Left or Right. Continued, stalled or reversed. The three waves identified.
The three waves are not absolutely clear-cut from one another. Some authors fit into more than one perspective, although in this article I suggest this leads to some contradictions. But they do show different waves, tendencies or perspectives in globalisation theory.
This does not explicitly talk of three waves, but his approach is based on giving a more complex definition of globalisation than more extreme globalists but in a way which tries to keep up globalisation rather than lapsing into scepticism.
In this way, Scholte is in practice a third waver on globalisation. For reasons of space and to ensure greater depth of analysis I focus in this article on particular representatives of scepticism and transformationalism or post-scepticism. I focus on Hirst and Thompson and Held at el as they are widely seen as representatives of the second and third waves respectively, much read and cited as such, and rightly so as their perspectives are theoretically and empirically developed, and have addressed each others findings eg Open Democracy Hay and Marsh I focus on because they have reflected explicitly on the second and third waves, advocated the latter, and have been cited as important authors in this area see Holton Some third wavers practice a third perspective but without such a conscious reflection on the fact as in the case of Hay and Marsh.
Scholte falls into the former category. He does not refer to the waves idea but his ideas include all the characteristics of the third wave. His book is clear, accessible, user-friendly and widely discussed and cited. He provides a good example of the third wave in practice and the tensions that I wish to discuss in this article. A number of others such as Hopkins , Cameron and Palan , Holton and Hopper , also identify three waves but without going into any greater detail on this issue than the above thinkers.
Kofman and Youngs made an early brief outline of perspectives on globalisation but discuss two waves rather than three. That they have done this is significant for my argument and I will come to their approach at the end of this article. Bruff talks about three waves but in a way which categorises them differently, his first wave including more moderate globalisers such as Held and Scholte who most others categorise within the third wave, hyperglobalists excluded from the first wave within which most place them, and his third wave including neo-Gramscian and poststructuralist perspectives.
This article touches on the power of discourse as highlighted in neo-Gramscian and poststructuralist perspectives but there is not space here to expand further on such approaches. Neo-Gramscian and post-structuralist perspectives like those of Bruff and Cameron and Palan provide important advances in discussions of globalisation perspectives but my argument is that there is a problem in some of the earlier waves debates that has gone without being noted, that third wave theories reinforce the scepticism they seek to undermine.
Alongside some of the more recent discussions which take debates forward I think it is important to return to this earlier problem which has not been previously identified and needs to be brought out in the literature. There is a large and growing literature on cultural globalisation Tomlinson ; Nederveen Pieterse and on areas such as transnational civil society Keane There is not space in this article to cover all areas of globalisation studies so I will focus primarily on the economic and political dimensions of globalisation that are a main emphasis of some of the authors I am looking at, although I hope that I have highlighted some of the cultural dimensions above.
Beyond the second wave? This article is concerned with the second and third waves of globalisation theory. The first wave is seen by those in the second and third waves as having exaggerated the extent of globalisation, and as having argued for globalisation in an abstract and generalising way which does not account sufficiently for empirical evidence or for unevenness and agency in processes of globalisation. Third wave theorists try, to different degrees, to distance themselves from both more radical globalists and outright sceptics.
They try to defend an idea of globalisation, and so distance themselves from the sceptics, but in a more complicated way than has been put forward by the first wave. My core argument is that in doing this they add qualifications and complexities which actually bolster second wave sceptic arguments. This is not always the case and there are some differences between third wavers and sceptics.
But third wavers in trying to rescue globalisation theory by adding complexities and qualifications actually in some ways undermine it and add to the case for the sceptics. Third wave analysis claims to either rescue globalist arguments Held et al or to have a more sophisticated advance on second wave arguments Hay and Marsh As such it directs readers away from sceptical viewpoints to either a modified globalism Held et al or what is said to be a more sophisticated scepticism Hay and Marsh , the latter of which is couched in terms which accept a form of globalisation as an actuality.
The theory of second wave sceptics is projected as a weaker analysis. But if it transpires that third wavers are in fact confirming the second wave, whether they intend to or not, then it is important that the sceptical view is validated rather than treated as a less adequate analysis as it is by third wavers who are claiming to be able to provide something better.
Getting a correct understanding of what the third wave is actually saying is important to us understanding globalisation properly. Sceptics and third wavers have argued the toss over which of their perspectives is more adequate eg, Open Democracy but if it is the case that in fact third wavers are in practice reinforcing second wave scepticism then this new dimension needs to be identified. As I will outline in more detail later, a side-effect is that there are political consequences of this.
By drawing globalist conclusions, albeit more complex ones, from their analysis, and arguing they have shown the flaws in scepticism, some third wavers, such as Held et al, then go on to conclude that forms of politics such as cosmopolitan global democracy are the most appropriate ways for trying to direct globalisation along more progressive paths. Surmising that their analysis supports globalist perspectives leads them to such conclusions.
By drawing conclusions which go against scepticism they undermine the sceptical analysis of politics which argues for a more realist view of the world in which such global forms are not possible because of the superior power of advanced states, especially western states and the G3, the conflicting interests and ideologies of global actors, and the importance of politics at the level of nation-states, regional blocs and other alliances.
Sceptical analysis leads to conclusions which stress power, inequality, conflict and the importance of the nation-state, all of which point to a politics other than or as well as global democracy. This might rely on states, political alliances at a more decentralised level between states with similar objectives or interests, for instance perhaps a shared antipathy to what are perceived as neoliberalism or US imperialism, and specific global social movements who have related objectives.
This is rather than, or in addition to, more global universal structures, in which common agreement may not be possible and which may be hijacked by more powerful actors. It may be significant that Hay and Marsh do not show the same faith in cosmopolitan global democracy as Held et al. Their political conclusions are based more around the possibilities of nation-state politics. Transformationalists and postmodernists agree that the impact of globalization has been exaggerated by globalists but argue that it is foolish to reject the concept out of hand.
This theoretical position argues that globalization should be understood as a complex set of interconnecting relationships through which power, for the most part, is exercised indirectly. They suggest that the globalization process can be reversed, especially where it is negative or, at the very least, that it can be controlled. Transformationalists argue that the flow of culture is not one way, from the west to the developing world; it is a two-way exchange in which Western culture is also influenced, changed and enriched by cultures in the developing world.
Transformationlists and postmodernists also see the global media as beneficial because it is primarily responsible for diffusing different cultural styles around the world and creating new global hybrid styles in fashion, food, music, consumption and lifestyle. It is argued that in the global, postmodern world, such cultural diversity and pluralism will become the norm. Postmodernists thus see globalization as a positive phenomenon because it has created a new class of global consumers, in both the developed and the developing world, with a greater range of choice from which they can construct a hybridised global identity.
There is also evidence that global communications systems and social networks can assist local cultures to rid themselves of repressive political systems such as dictatorships. Kassim suggests that social networks broke down a psychological barrier of fear by helping people to connect and unite against repressive leaders, providing a catalyst for positive change.
In his classic text, Runaway World, Anthony Giddens argues that one consequence of globalization is detraditionalisation — where people question their traditional beliefs about religion, marriage, and gender roles and so on. Ulrich Beck argues that a fundamental feature of globalization is the development of a global risk consciousness, which emerges due to shared global problems which threaten people in multiple countries — examples include the threat of terrorism, international nuclear war, the threat of global pandemics, the rise of organised crime funded primarily through international drug trafficking, and the threat of planetary melt-down due to global warming.
On the downside, the constant media focus on such global problems has led to a widespread culture of fear and increasing anxiety across the globe, which has arguably contributed to things such as Paranoid Parenting and Brexit, but on the plus side, new global international movements and agencies have emerged through which people come together across borders to tackle such problems. This definition is focused on the economic implications of globalisation; however it includes a more social connotation.
Hirst and Thompson are sceptical about the ideas presented by the UN et al and Stiglitz. The future of globalisation. Cooperation and Conflict, 37 3 , These three theories have similarities; however each idea represents a different view point of the term Globalisation.
They believe this is a new phenomenon and that we are witnessing the development of a new world order. They tend to hold an inherently capitalist view on the idea of globalisation. Held, D, A. McGrew, D. They agree with Globalists to an extent, in terms of globalisation being a new subject, and that is it creating a new world order.
However Transformationalists think that the end result of globalisation is not as simple as the glob- alists believe, due to it being complex and non-linear. They feel the current debate regarding this topic ought to be about power and its distribution and organisation and this will determine the success of globalisation. Sceptics, such as Hirst and Thompson, disagree with the Globalist theory and they are much more cautious.
They believe that globalisation, its architecture and its actual patterns are confined to ef- fecting only a selection of large OECD states. Instead of global economic interdependence Sceptics believe what we are actually witnessing is the world breaking up into different economic and politi- cal blocs. Hirst, P. The Transformationalist can be viewed as the intermediate between the Globalist and the Sceptic.
Fundamentally, the aims of globalisation are to facilitate international trade, encourage the integra- tion of world markets, and allow a more even distribution of wealth. It seems fail safe; remove trade barriers, encouraging more trade, more trade leads to more growth, more growth leads to increased employment rates, etc. Economic Impact! There have been numerous economies that have benefited as a result of globalisation, or opening up their markets; China being one of the most prominent.
Since , their GDP per capita has grown rapidly, and in was USD source: OECD stats indicat- ing that their removal of barriers to trade and increasing economic integration have been a success. They implemented a strategic policy in terms of foreign direct invest- 2! Although China opened up its economy and reduced trade barriers the Chinese government main- tained a dominant role in strategic decision making.
China is an example of how globalisation can be effective, when it is managed in a way that is tailored to a specific economy Das, Dilip K.
During the same time period in which China prospered, the Latin American economy experienced a contrasting series of events. During the nineties, under the Washington Consensus, Latin America began implementing globalist style policies such as minimising the role of government, privatisa- tion of institutions and liberalising markets. Focus was on inflation as opposed to growth and un- employment.
Short term capital flowed in as opposed to FDI, and this currency crisis prone and po- litically unstable region paid the price. When political instability worries rose, investors began to withdraw short term investments fast, causing interest rates to rise and unemployment to grow. Poverty levels have not improved as a result of the Washington Consensus, in fact one could argue that the forcing of open markets by institutions like the IMF, has actually caused a greater inequality in economies such as Latin America.
0コメント