What is meant by Globalisation

Introduction

Since its invention and inception into the global forum, globalisation has been a subject of a more and much spirited debate; neither its advocates nor its critics seem to have a grasp on its handles let alone on its advantages and meaning. The meaning of the word globalisation has been explored by many scholars, leading to a strong controversy whose agreement is always difficulty to come by, an intellectual scandal almost. Despite the existence of divergent views and typologies on the term globalisation by authors, there is a broad agreement that although globalisation may be a contested concept, there is no dissent from the view that we live in a period of globalisation.

Definition of Globalisation

In his definition of Globalisation, Prof. Anthony Giddens (1999) says that "Globalisation link distant localities in such a way that local happening’s are shaped by distant events" and vice versa. Prof. Giddens goes on to state that we would have to create new institutions or modify the existing ones for the new global age. "We live in a world of transformations, affecting almost everything we do. For better or worse, we are being propelled into a global order that no one fully understands. The ungainly word globalisation was rarely used up until the late eighties, and now it has come from nowhere to be almost everywhere" (Giddens, 1999). He goes on to state that advances in information and communication technologies are the main force behind globalisation. This according to him is because it allows information to flow more effectively, which in turn helps in building of a global perspective. For economists, globalisation is the process of moving towards a world in which production, distribution, sales, finance, and investment are done without regard to national boundaries. It has usually a quantitative expression and is related with business and wealth expansion.

For political scientists, this definition has a broader, more complex nature, and competing definitions abound in theory books. They can be divided into two major groups: (1) the group of the proponents that globalisation is simply a new bottle for old wine: they state that global exchanges and contacts are an old phenomenon and many defend that it is not correct to refer to "a globalisation" but to "globalisations", since "no single process (of this dimension) can be labelled globalisation at the risk of severe oversimplification, serious misunderstanding, or both" (Guidry & all: 340). (2) the group of those who recognise the existence of a new phenomenon, in dimension and in nature (Giddens, Robertson, etc). "We are at the beginning of a fundamental shake-out of world society, which comes from numerous sources" (Giddens, 1998). The contradictory tendencies of this new process of change are described by way of an aphorism borrowed from Leon Tolstoy: "Globalisation is then the "universalisation of the particular and the particularisation of the universal". The presence of the 'isation' suffix emphasises that the local and the global are in dynamic interaction with one another. Scholte adds that globalisation involves "the growth of 'supraterritorial relations' among people" (2000:46) and for Tomlinson, it is a process of "complex connectivity", i.e., a set of "multivalent connections that now bind our practices, our experiences and our political, economic and environmental fates together across the modern world" (1999:2). Associated with this change in the character of social relationships for both authors is the notion of "deterritorialisation". This concept refers to the decrease of the relative importance of physical location as a basis for building social relationships as trans and supraterritorial ties grow in significance. In this respect, 'globalisation' is bringing far-reaching changes to the nature of the social dimension. In a recent book entitled Global Transformations, Held and associates suggest the following characterisation: It is an historically unprecedented process with regard to four spatio-temporal dimensions: the extensiveness of global networks, the intensity of global interconnectedness, the velocity of global flows, and the impact propensity of global interconnectedness (Held, et al. 1999:17). Globalisation may be thought of initially as the widening, deepening and speeding up of worldwide interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary social life, from the cultural to the criminal, the financial to the spiritual. (Held et al. 1999, 2). Held and associates provide a more precise definition of globalisation as: A process (or set of processes) which embodies a transformation in the spatial organisation of social relations and transactions–assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact–generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction, and the exercise of power. (Held et al. 1999, 16) As noted by Sinclair (2001), this "massive shakeout" induced by globalisation (Giddens 1996) creates moral dilemmas in the form of great opportunities for, as well as challenges to, human progress. The Human Development Report (United Nations 1999:2), , but not necessarily of equity.... When the market goes too far in dominating social and political outcomes, the opportunities and rewards of suggests one such moral dilemma: "... competitive markets may be the best guarantee of efficiency globalisation spread unequally and inequitably--concentration of power and wealth in a select group of people, nations and corporations, marginalising the others". Levels of analysis McMichael (1994) has analyzed rural and agrarian restructuring along three dimensions: state level, sectoral level, and global level. He views the process of globalisation as a movement from economic development being organised at the state or national level toward being organised at an increasingly global level. Held and associates suggest that approaches to globalisation can be roughly divided into three broad categories:

hyperglobalisers,
sceptics and
transformationalists.

Hyperglobalisers believe that globalisation represents a new epoch in human history, in which all types of relationships are becoming integrated at the global level, transcending the nation-state and making it increasingly irrelevant. Ever-increasing cross-border flows of capital, commodities, people and ideas are a defining factor of the new age. Hyperglobalisers include both those who view such trends as positive and those with more negative assessments.

This is a preview of the whole essay

hyperglobalisers,
sceptics and
transformationalists.

The positive hyperglobalisers are mainly neo-liberal advocates of open, global markets, who believe that these will guarantee optimal economic growth and will, in the long run, bring about improved living standards for everyone. For instance, the influential Japanese management consultant, Kenichi Ohmae (1991; 1995) argues that nation-states have become nothing but a nuisance in a world economy dominated by transnational corporations (TNCs) and global markets for capital, commodities and labour. Democratic control through states is outmoded–instead people can exert their will through free choices as consumers. However, positive hyperglobalist views are also to be found among scholars with a much more broadly-based interpretation of the process. For instance Martin Albrow’s The Global Age depicts globalisation as a process of transition from the age of modernity to a new global age, which present important new opportunities and challenges for humanity (Albrow 1996).

Negative hyperglobalist views can be found the critical and neo-marxist literature. In the recent bestseller, The Global Trap, the starting point is the explosion of global media, and the burgeoning of global mobility. However, the authors argue that such trends only benefit a small middle-class elite, while for most people, globalisation means the that the world is becoming ‘a lumpen planet, rich only in megacities with megaslums, where billions of people eke out a meagre living’ (Martin and Schumann 1997, 23). Globalisation is the mechanism for the rule of international investors and transnational corporations, who can no longer be controlled by ever-weaker nation-states. Trade unions and welfare systems are collapsing. Unemployment and social exclusion are burgeoning, while uncontrolled growth is leading to life-threatening environmental degradation. Thus globalisation can lead to social fragmentation, cultural uncertainty, conflict and violence.

We can, therefore, attempt at defining -and assessing- global changes by accepting the following working-definition - Globalisation is a complex multi-level process where the following characteristics can be observed by: (a) existence of shifts in the degree to which cultural, technological, political and economic activities are 'stretching' across frontiers creating a global space; (b) strong changes in the intensity, speed and regularity of global interactions and processes; (c) changes in the levels of interdependence between the global and the local.

Three kinds of globalisation

Globalisation is a process of degrees. Holm and Sorensen’s definition of globalisation as the “intensification of economic, political, social and cultural relations across borders” nicely captures this claim (Holm and Sorensen, 1995, p.1.) Those who are sceptical about the existence of globalisation generally point to lower
than expected levels of integration of markets for a genuinely global economy. (McGrew, Goldblatt and Perraton, 1999, p.5.) Globalisation says Anthony Giddens in The Third Way is an ugly word. Perhaps in part this is attributable to the fact that it refers to three distinct processes; (1) the globalisation of firms, (2) the globalisation of markets (3) the globalisation of regulation. Each type of globalisation involves, at base, a comprehensive spread of a phenomenon. Global firms are firms that begin their legal life in a territory and spreadtheir operations through corporate groups and structures to other territories. Global markets, such as financial markets are where buyers and sellers from any one territory can transact business with buyers and sellers from any other territory. The globalisation of regulation involves the spread of some set of regulatory norms.

lie three broad accounts of the nature and meaning of globalization today, referred to here as the hyperglobalist, the skeptical, and the transformationalist views.

Hyperglobalists argue that we live in an increasingly global world in which states are being subject to massive economic and political processes of change. These are eroding and fragmenting nation-states and diminishing the power of politicians. In these circumstances, states are increasingly the 'decision- takers' and not the 'decision-makers'.

The skeptics strongly resist this view and believe that contemporary global circumstances are not unprecedented. In their account, while there has been an intensification of international and social activity in recent times, this has reinforced and enhanced state powers in many domains.

The transformationalists argue that globalization is creating new economic, political and social circumstances which, however unevenly, are serving to transform state powers and the context in which states operate. They do not predict the outcome - indeed, they believe it is uncertain - but argue that politics is no longer, and can no longer simply be, based on nation-states.

Globalization can usefully be conceived as a process (or set of processes) which embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions, generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and power. It is characterized by four types of change:
First, it involves a stretching of social, political and economic activities across political frontiers regions and continents.

Second, it suggests the intensification, or the growing magnitude, of interconnectedness and flows of trade, investment, finance, migration, culture, etc.

Third, the growing extensity and intensity of global interconnectedness can be linked to a speeding up of global interactions and processes, as the evolution of world-wide systems of transport and communication increases the velocity of the diffusion of ideas, goods, information, capital, and people.

Fourth, the growing extensity, intensity and velocity of global interactions can be associated with their deepening impact such that the effects of distant events can be highly significant elsewhere and even the most local developments may come to have enormous global consequences. In this sense, the boundaries between domestic matters and global affairs can become increasingly blurred.

In sum, globalization can be thought of as the widening, intensifying, speeding up, and growing impact of world-wide interconnectedness.

The causes of globalisation

What has brought about globalisation? We find a great variety of explanations in the literature. Virtually all analysts draw attention to the rapid growth in global economic flows, particularly of trade and capital. In both hyperglobalist and sceptical views on globalisation, economic factors are usually seen as predominant. Ohmae (1991) celebrates the power of TNCs and global markets in overcoming anachronistic nation-state boundaries. Similarly, authors with social-democratic or neo-marxist perspectives such as Reich (1991); Hopkins and Wallerstein (1996); Beck (1997) emphasise economic changes, although the latter goes on to show how alleged economic imperatives are often a cloak for new forms of political control. An analysis by an intergovernmental body (OECD 1997) stresses economic causes, but goes on to examine social consequences. The main sceptical accounts, such as Hirst and Thompson (1996; Weiss (1997) also focus on trade and investment.

Other authors see the main driving force elsewhere. Castells (1996) stresses scientific innovation, especially the rapid development of information technology: globalisation goes hand-in-hand with the spread of an ‘informational mode of production’ which is replacing the industrial mode. However, all this takes place in the context of a restructured capitalist ‘mode of regulation’ of the world economy. Capitalism has not exhausted its potential for change, and the profit-motive remains the dominant motivating force. Other writers emphasis the importance of global media which diffuse a new global culture, largely based on US values–MacDonaldisation or Disneyfication of the world (eg. Martin and Schumann 1997). New forms of urbanisation are seen as important by some observers, notably Saskia Sassen with her analysis of ‘the global city’ (Sassen 1991). Giddens (1990) stresses the importance of ‘time-space compression’ the way in which new forms of communication and transport speed up flows and transaction to the point that old barriers become meaningless. Bauman (1998) takes up this notion, and shows how new forms of global stratification are emerging, especially the class division between those who have the resources and knowledge to become mobile and participate in global markets for employment, social good and cultural symbols; and those confined to a purely local (and therefore disempowered) existence.

Some accounts of globalisation focus on international relations and the development of global and regional forms of governance. Strategic and military criteria are seen as equal in importance to political economy. The end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Bloc are crucial in creating the political conditions for globalisation. An extreme view on this is provided by (Fukuyama 1992): his idea of ‘the end of history’ implies that liberalism, having defeated communism, is now a universally-accepted model for economic and political cooperation. By contrast, most international relations scholars argue that the end of the bipolar world has opened the way to new types of fragmentation and conflict, which present major threats to democracy and social order. Castells (1997) and Huntington (1993)–from widely differing perspectives–stress the emergence of new forms of identity politics. McGrew (1997) examines the future perspectives for democracy and the state and supra-state levels. Links between international relations, regionalisation and globalisation in the Asia-Pacific region are explored in Berger and Borer (1997).

Some of the most interesting discussions of the origins of globalisation put it in a long historical perspective. If globalisation represents a major social transformation for the whole world, does this mean that it is a new phase of modernity, or the emergence of post-modernity, or the beginning of an altogether new ‘global age’? Such discussions are pursued at length by such authors as Albrow (1996); Giddens (1990); Lyotard (1984); Robertson (1992); Bauman (1998). This topic may seem somewhat abstract, but in fact has considerable significance. If we accept the idea of a new age or epoch, it implies not only major economic and political changes, but also the need for new philosophical principles and cultural values appropriate to a new type of civilisation. The changes would be as major as those between the ancient and the medieval world, or between the medieval and the modern world.

(First, globalisation is a multi-faceted phenomenon involving more issues than the fluxion of economy and polity around "free" trade. It simultaneously effects and incites ethical and practical reactions concerning national boundaries, environment, community, health, wealth, language and essentially all other matters with social valence. Second, globalization has diverse and differential impacts both between the developed and developing nations and within them. Third, globalization has generated collective angst and organised protest. (Jobes 2003: 73) Most definitions of globalisation emphasise the integration of local economies and polities into international systems. The World System, as a labyrinth of causes and effects, had been established by 1600 (Wallerstein 1974: 126-141). Arguably the broadest of concepts pertaining to macro social systems, globalisation evokes recognition of the most personal micro systems, including local ethnic, family, religious groups and their identities. Globalisation includes a mechanical component and a social organisational component. Technologically it is built upon a common set of interlocking structures for communication, transportation, computation and enforcement. A cultural lag may be inevitable as society and culture straggle to accommodate to the evolving mechanical world (Ogburn 1927). Globalisation operates in every level of polity and economy from the family and local shire through the national and world bureaucracies. It is reflected in the internationalisation of education, law and medicine. Globalisation is related to religion through the world spread of religions, their ensuing conflicts and their nemeses, the spread of popular culture, music, and alternative lifestyles. (Jobes 2003)

A Sociological Interpretation of Globalisation

Globalisation is the development of centralised social, political and economic relationships among nations and their peoples. Sociologists emphasise that the economic and the political are interdependent with the social. In its purest form globalisation would extinguish boundaries that impede the free exchange of such relationships. Its critics tend to emphasise economic and political forces responsible for globalisation, while neglecting social and cultural forces. Perhaps no other process makes paradoxes related to boundaries more apparent (Jobes: 2003). Classic social theory puts globalisation into perspective. Following Adam Smith (1992), the inevitable transformation involves free and voluntary participation in a free market to gain optimal economic development and democratic governance. Following Marx, the inevitable transformation is a struggle involving the economic, hence political, advantage and domination of the advantaged over the disadvantaged. The advantaged in this instance are urban agents of exchange and privileged capitalists from the First World nations of the `North'. More than any other classic social theorist, Max Weber (1930) emphasised the mutual interdependence of economy, polity and society, that is, class, power and status. Following Weber, changes in culture lead to modifications of economy and polity, just as changes in the political and economic realms eventuate beliefs and behaviours. The amoral consumption that drives capitalism makes it insidiously attractive to many people, and anathema to moralists who believe in other ideals. Simmel (1971) identified this struggle between the amoral culturally-relative economically-rational individual and the moral collectivity, as the unresolvable foundation of modern conflict, the parent of modern social issues. The consequences of globalisation vary over time, place, and any other factors associated with development. New systems of technology and organisation put pressure on all producers to become more efficient. Some locales prosper even when most places suffer. Some industrial techniques are effective in some places and not in others. Some locations prosper at one time and fail during others. The interlocking centralisation of globalisation simultaneously incurs catastrophes, like mad cow disease, and in their wake stimulates resources to resolve them. The destruction of contaminated livestock in Europe created a windfall for graziers in Australia. .

Criticism of Globalisation

It is insufficient, to criticise globalisation as an undesirable process, which it clearly is. Globalisation leaves broken people, families, communities and societies in its wake. Its critics face two quandaries regarding what, if anything, can counter those impacts. The first is to propose a more desirable process. The second is to suggest ways of mitigating undesirable consequences, if no more desirable alternative exists. Wallerstein (2000: 265) is thoroughly pessimistic. `In terms of the ongoing reality, it will be almost impossible for political action to affect it very much.' The authors of this forum indicate the profundity of problems of globalisation, especially in rural areas. Their articles indicate that cultural and social factors are involved in the transformation, as well as the economy and the polity. These cultural and social factors provide the foundations for the support, resistance and vulnerability of every community and every society grappling with how to respond to global transformation.

Bibliography

Giddens Proff, (1999) Globalisation, BBC Reith Lecturers, broadcast on 7 April 1999.

Giddens Anthony [1999, November], Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) [Online]. Available: [10 October 2004].

Giddens, A (1999). Runaway World: How Globalization Is Reshaping Our Lives. Profile Books.

Giddens, A (1998). Excerpts from a keynote address at the UNRISD conference on globalisation and citizenship in Guidry, Kennedy & Zald (2000). Globalizations and Social Movements. Michigan Press.

Jobes Patrick C., (2003) Globalization and Regional Renewal Revisited. Australian Journal of Social Issues, Volume: 38, Issue: 1,pp. 73ff.

Neef, D. (1999), "Making the case for knowledge management: the bigger picture", MCB, Management Decision, Vol 37 Issue 1. 1999.

Ogburn, W.F. (1927) Social Change with Regard to Culture and Original Nature, Revised Edition, New York: Viking.

Smith, A. (1992) An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, edited by Fred R. Glahe, Savage, MD, Rowman and Littlefield.

Simmel, G. (1971) On Individuality and Social Forces, (edited by D.N. Levine), Chicago. University of Chicago Press.

Wallerstein, I. (1974), The Modern World System, New York, Academic Press. Wallerstein, I. (2000),`Globalisation or the Age of Transition? A Long-Term View of the Trajectory of the World System', International Sociology, 15 (2), 249-265.

Weber, M. (1930) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, (translated by Talcott Parsons) New York, Scribners. Cliffe, S. (1998), "Knowledge management: The well-connected business", Harvard Business Review, Boston, Jul/Aug 1998.

Duffy. J. (2000), "Knowledge management: To be or not to be", Information Management Journal, Prairie Village, Jan 2000.

Hansen.M,, Nohria.N., Tierney.T. (1999), "What's your strategy for managing knowledge?", Harvard Business Review, Boston; Mar/Apr 1999.

Kim. W, Mauborgne. R. (1999), "Strategy, value innovation, and the knowledge economy", Sloan Management Review, Cambridge, Spring 1999.

Powell, T.(2000),"Tech Knowledge: Disinformation about knowledge management", Competitive Intelligence Magazine, Jan-Mar 2000.

• Keck & Sikking (1998). Activists beyond borders. New York: Cornell University Press.

Held, McGrew, Goldblat & Perraton. (1999). Global Transformations. Stanford University Press.

Risse, , Ropp & Sikkink (1999). The Power of Principles: International Human Rights Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Robertson, Roland (1992), Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. Sage Publications.

Smith, Chatfield & Pagnucco. (1997). Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics. Syracuse University Press.

Tomlinson, John. (1999). Globalization and Culture. University of Chicago Press.

Albrow, Martin. 1996. The Global Age. Cambridge: Polity.

Amin, Samir. 1974. Accumulation on a World Scale. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Baeck, Louis. 1993. Post-War Development Theories and Practice. Paris: UNESCO and The International Social Science Council.

Bauman, Zygmunt. 1998. Globalization: the Human Consequences. Cambridge: Polity.

Beck, Ulrich. 1997. Was ist Globalisierung? Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Berger, Mark T. 1997. "Conclusion: the coming of the Pacific Century: the Cold War and after in the Asia-Pacific." in The Rise of East Asia: Critical Visions of the Pacific Century, edited by Mark T. Berger and Douglas A. Borer. London and New York: Routledge.

Berger, Mark T., and Douglas A. Borer (Eds.). 1997. The Rise of East Asia: Critical Visions of the Pacific Century. London and New York: Routledge.

Bezanson, Keith, and Stephany Griffith-Jones. 1999. "The East Asian Crisis: a global problem requiring global solutions." IDS Bulletin 30.

Borthwick, Mark (Ed.). 1992. Pacific Century: The Emergence of Modern Pacific Asia. Boulder, Col.: Westview Press.

Castells, Manuel. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwells.

Castells, Manuel. 1997. The Power of Identity. Oxford: Blackwells.

Castells, Manuel. 1998. End of Millenium. Oxford: Blackwells.

FitzGerald, Stephen. 1997. Is Australia an Asian Country? Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Froebel, Friedrich, Jurgen Henricks, and Otto Kreye. 1980. The New International Division of Labour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fukuyama, Francis. 1992. The End of History and the Last Man. London: Penguin.

Giddens, Anthony. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.

Godement, Francois. 1999. The Downsizing of Asia. London: Routledge.

Held, David, Anthony McGrew, David Goldblatt, and J. Perraton. 1999. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity.

Hirst, Paul, and Grahame Thompson. 1996. Globalization in Question. Cambridge: Polity.

Hoogvelt, Ankie. 1997. Globalisation and the Postcolonial World. Basingstoke and London: Macmillan.

Hopkins, Terence K., and Immanuel Wallerstein (Eds.). 1996. The Age of Transition: Trajectory of the World-System, 1945-2025. London and New York

Huntington, Samuel. 1993. "The clash of civilisations." Foreign Affairs 72:22-49.

Lyotard, J.F. 1984. The Postmodern Condition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Martin, Hans-Peter, and Harald Schumann. 1997. The Global Trap: Globalization and the Assault on Prosperity and Democracy. London and New York, and Sydney: Zed Books and Pluto Press Australia.

McGrew, Anthony (Ed.). 1997. The Transformation of Democracy: Globalisation and Territorial Democacy. Cambridge: Polity in association with the Open University.

OECD (Ed.). 1997. Societal Cohesion and the Globalising Economy. Paris: OECD.

Ohmae, Kenichi. 1991. The Borderless World. New York: Harper Collins.

Ohmae, Kenichi. 1995. The End of the Nation-State: The Rise of Regional Economies. New York: Harper Collins.

Polanyi, Karl. 1944. The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time. New York: Farrar and Rinehart.

Portes, Alejandro. 1997. "Neoliberalism and sociology of development: emerging trends and unanticipated facts." Population and Development Rreview 23:229-59.

Reich, Robert B. 1991. The Work of Nations. London: Simon and Schuster.

Robertson, R. 1992. Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, Newbury Park & New Delhi: Sage.

Sassen, Saskia. 1991. The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Schnapper, Dominique. 1994. La Communauté des Citoyens. Paris: Gallimard.

Wallerstein, Immanuel. 1984. The Politics of the World Economy: The States, the Movements, and the Civilisations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weiss, Linda. 1997. "Globalization and the myth of the powerless state." New Left Review 225: 3-27.

Wiseman, John (Ed.). 1997. Alternatives to Globalisation: an Asia-Pacific Perspective. Melbourne: Community Aid Abroad