Who Are the Winners and Losers of Globalisation

Who are the winners and losers of globalization? Globalization is the process of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products goods and services, ideas, and other aspects of culture. It is featured in nearly every country in the world and this is through mainly the trading of goods from one country to another. Globalisation can bring wealth into a country as it brings in more products or materials to be sold or to produce many more goods locally and industrially.

Globalisation can also bring a variety of culture into a country as different foods and ideas are transported from another country. Globalization has expanded the profits of many companies such as McDonalds, KFC, Uniqlo, H&M and so many more. Without Globalisation these companies would seize to do well in the economic world as they would be limited to one country or place and the stock that they sell would probably be a lot more expensive and harder to make and these companies get stock and parts shipped from all around the world.

However, many people who are concerned about the fate of the world's poor now attribute their trouble with globalization. They argue that globalization has weakened the position of poor countries and exposed poor people to harmful competition as local shops, and business lose out on custom due t the larger stores being opened up in the area, moreover these local shops would struggle to compete with the cheap prices of goods from the larger shops this is due to the fact that the big stores get their products in bulk and mainly imported.

Their concern is understandable, especially since the gap between rich and poor has indeed become more glaring in recent decades. However, proving a direct link between economic globalization and poverty is a complex task for several reasons. Firstly, specifying how globalization affects the economic status of countries or individuals is not easy. this is why most of the time GDP (gross national product) is calculated in USD to make comparisons a lot easier.

It is hard to determine if globalization is either negative or positive due to the fact that it affects different countries as If globalization is the cause of poverty, then countries that become more economically integrated through trade and investment should do worse than they do. But some that have become more integrated into the world economy and trade, such as America, have made progress and would not be at the top end of the worlds economy. However, countries such as Africa have benefited little from the outsourcing from other countries due to exploitation and corruption in the governments.

This leads on to my conclusion which is that the MEDC’s benefit much more grately from globalisation and this is due to the fact that advantages are that globalisation prevents saturation in particular markets and this is done as many things as outsourcing is most common. An example of this is that there may be too many call centers in the UK so they are moved to india and places like that. More over, LEDC’s have the least to benefit from globalisation as it creates intense competition that makes it hard for local businesses to establish themselves;This then broadens the development gap.

Anti-Globalization different

“Globalization” means different things to many people.  Some think of it positively, while others don’t.  Some view it with hope and confidence, others with fear, sometimes with hostility.

Globalization, according to the definition of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), is a historical process, the result of human innovation and technological process.  It refers to the increasing integration of economies around the world, particularly trade and financial flows.

The term sometimes also refers to the movement of people (labor) and knowledge (technology) across international borders” (IMF Staff, 2002).       A more simplistic definition of globalization refers to it as the “process of increasing the connectivity and interdependence of the world's markets and businesses” (Investor Words, 2007).  Such a process has sped up dramatically in the last two decades as technological advances make it easier for people to travel, communicate, and do business globally.

Globalization is not entirely a new concept.  Analysts argued that the world economy became global as early as during the height of the rivalry between Spain and Portugal for world supremacy in the 15th Century.  Commerce and financial services are just far more developed and deeply entrenched now than they were at that time because of the availability of modern electronic communication.

Moreover, commerce and trade among countries have been simplified with the establishment in 1995 of the World Trade Organization, a powerful international body composed of 150 countries, mandated to mediate trade disputes among member nations.

While the WTO is relatively young, its trading system is over half a century old because its predecessor was the General Agreement on Tariff and Tax (GATT) which was founded in 1948.  The old GATT evolved through several rounds of negotiation until it was renamed into the present WTO with expanded powers and responsibilities that now cover trade in services and traded inventions, creations, and designs – collectively known as intellectual property.

Officials of  IMF, World Bank and WTO have high hopes for globalization to improve the impoverished lives of people across the globe, particularly those from Africa.

 They take credit for the improvement of Third World economies, including that of India, in recent years.  Developed countries such as the United States, EU, Japan, and Canada have bonded together to collectively endorse trade globalization through the WTO as a means to liberalize trade  (IMF Staff, 2000).

Unfortunately not everyone is happy with globalization, particularly developing countries.  Some view the WTO with distrust and have rejected it altogether.  Others with suspicion and misgiving, but joined it nevertheless as a necessary evil.  They feel globalization is the handiwork of multinational companies out to dictate their terms to the hapless Third World.

In general, those who oppose globalization as institutionalized by the WTO, World Bank, and other similar institutions, believe that it undermines the sovereign will of poor and developing countries in favor of multinational corporations from developed countries. They claim that corporations are given too much privilege to move freely across borders, extracting desired natural resources from poor countries and claiming them as their “intellectual property.”

For example, a multinational company could secure a certain plant or organism with medicinal value endemic to a particular country and claim to own it under the rules of intellectual property.

Because of the stringent, or rather lopsided, rules on intellectual property rights by the WTO in favor of multinational companies, countries are becoming more and more subservient to multinational pharmaceutical companies for the treatment of dreaded diseases like AIDs.

Despite the availability of cheaper generic drugs, many countries in Africa stricken with the AIDS pandemic are unable to secure them “because countries must jump through multiple hoops to prove they are truly in need, unable to afford patented drugs and incapable of producing the medicines domestically. Meanwhile, there is no guarantee that there will be a sufficient supply of drugs for them to buy, since the deal also puts up hurdles for countries wanting to export” (Klein, 2001).

Poor agricultural countries are likewise at the losing end of the bargain in so far as globalization is concerned.  Aside from their access to cheap agricultural inputs, including mechanized equipment, developed countries provide heavy subsidies not just in terms in farm inputs but also in terms export subsidies that make their agricultural products more attractive on the international market.

Farm products such as vegetables, beef, and poultry are practically being dumped in poorer countries at prices that cause declines in the agricultural sector of many developing nations.

“The current inequities of the global trading system are being perpetuated rather than resolved under the WTO, given the unequal balance of power between member countries, according to Jean Ziegler, UN Special rapporteur on the Right to Food” (Wikipedia, 2007).  Such inequality is evident in the refusal of the United States to sign and honor the Tokyo Protocol, which compels countries to reduce the use of fossil fuel to reduce global warming, and still get away with it.

Using their rights as WTO members and drawing support from the academe and non-government organizations, insider critics of the International Property Rights have openly criticized trade liberation as a bad policy that “move money from people in developing countries” (Intellectual Property Rights, Wikipedia).   They have demonstrated their opposition to many WTO policies in various fora, including mass rallies and demonstrations during important WTO meetings.

The first international anti-globalization protest was organized simultaneously in many cities around the world on June 18, 1999.  The movement was called the Carnival Against Capitalism, or J18 for short.   The day was marked by organizers as an international of protest to coincide with the 25th G8 Summit in Koln, Germany.  The protest in Eugene, Oregon turned into a riot when rallyists drove the police out of a small park.

The second major mobilization of the anti-globalization movement was held on November 30, 1999, and was known as N30.  It is by far the most unsettling protest action against globalization, with protesters blocking delegates’ entrance to the WTO meetings in Seattle, USA.

The protesters and Seattle riot police clashed in the streets after police fired tear gas at demonstrators who blocked the streets and refused to disperse. Over 600 protesters were arrested and thousands were injured.

The protest movement was inextricably anti-globalization and anti-multinational corporation (MNC), but was unclear over the alternatives and new directions it wished to offer.

  Nevertheless, the movement,  including the less eventful A16 Movement in Washington D.C., cannot be ignored as it spelled out in no uncertain terms the widespread anguish about the direction that globalization has taken and a sense of loss of democratic control by developing countries over their options.

The protest also demonstrated lack of faith in the legitimacy of international institutions to objectively mediate trade disputes among nations because of a perceived notion that rules are loaded in favor developed countries.

The protest movement debunks First World perception that it has the answers to problems being encountered by their Third World neighbors over issues of trade, health, food supply, poverty, environment, etc.   It does not, especially given our global history of abuse by wealthy nations to amass wealth and power at the expenses of poorer nations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barnet, Richard J. & Ronald E. Muller. 1974. Global Reach: The Power of the Multinational Corporations. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Berry, Jeffrey M. 1999. The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups.

Washington: The Brookings Institution.

Gill, Stephen. 2000. Towards a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New Politics of Globalization. Millennium, 29(1): 131-40.

IMF Staff. 2000.  Globalization:  Threat or Opportunity?

Investor Words. 2007.  Globalization.

Kanbur, Ravi. 2001. Economic Policy, Distribution and Poverty: The Nature of Disagreements. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University.

Keohane, Robert. O and Joseph S. Nye. 1977 Power and Interdependence: World

Politics in Transition. Boston: Little Brown.

Klein, Naomi. 2001. No Logo. New York: Picador.

Lichbach, Mark I and Paul Almeida. 2001 “Global Order and Local Resistance: The

Neoliberal Institutional Trilemma and the Battle of Seattle.” Working Paper: University

of California, Riverside, February 26.

 

Globalization of Deforestation

Before you can understand anything surrounding deforestation, you must know what it actually is. Many people believe that it is just cutting down trees, specifically in the rainforests. They are correct, but there is much more to it than that. Yes, deforestation is cutting down trees, but what many people don’t know are the effects that it has. Deforestation affects almost every aspect of life. It affects the atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, as well as the global economy and politics. Many people believe that deforestation is a modern idea that was brought on by the industrialization era.

The truth is deforestation has been around since the beginning of mankind. Scientists believe that most of Europe had become deforested by 1850 (Kaplan 3024). As you can see, deforestation has been occurring for a long time, and globalization has just sped up the process and increased the rates. But what all does deforestation actually affect? The list is nearly endless, because it is different in every environment and population. On a global scale though deforestation affects greenhouse gases, climate, soil fertility, water quality, watersheds, and biodiversity.

Deforestation causes all of the CO2 gases stored in trees to be released into the atmosphere which increases greenhouse gases and ultimately affects the climate and global warming. Tropical deforestation alone, “accounts for about 15 percent of the world’s global warming pollution—more than that produced by every car, truck, plane, ship, and train on Earth” (Boucher 1). The area where deforestation occurs destroys the soil’s fertility inhibiting it from being able to regrow there. Erosion caused by deforestation runs off into streams, rivers, and lakes which affect the water quality and watersheds.

Deforestation also affects biodiversity, because it kills or helps kill off plants and animals that are important to the local environment. With all of these negative effects, you would think that deforestation would be a hot topic. The truth is that most people will agree that deforestation is wrong, but very few of them will do anything about it. That is why I believe all of the policies, laws and programs which surround deforestation should be brought to greater attention and enforced. One of the leading rograms which has helped reduce deforestation in several countries is REDD, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation. Seeing deforestation has a leading cause of emissions is new and this program has had more success than past ones. Basically, “countries are compensated if they reduce their carbon emissions from forest clearing” (Boucher 1). This gives developing and developed countries incentive to reduce deforestation because they would make more money from not deforesting than they would from deforesting.

This program has gained support from the United Nations and several countries are already adopting it. But, if we want to slow down or even stop this “monster” called deforestation then we need all of the world’s help. That is why we need to get programs like REDD and the effects of deforestation out to the public. We have all of these ideas, programs, policies, and laws which could help with the issue of deforestation, but nothing is being done to help enforce and inform people about them.

All industries should try to make their products as green as possible because every little bit counts. Sure, it might cost a little more, but in the long run it is for the greater good. Just as Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, “A nation that destroys its soils destroys itself. Forests are the lungs of our land, purifying the air and giving fresh strength to our people. ” Although the forests are much more than that, it is true that deforestation will destroy a country and the world in time.

Impact of Globalization on Indian Education

Impact of Globalization on Indian Education

Abstract

We are living in the “Era of Globalization”. Globalisation is not a synonym of Global business, but it is more than that. Globalisation poses variety of complex trends in the economic, social and cultural fabrics of all societies. We live in an intensely interdependent world in which all immense differences of culture and historical experience are compressed together in instant communication. The international transactions in services are defined as the economic output of intangible commodities that may be produced, transferred and consumed at the same time. Traditionally services are viewed as domestic activities due to direct contact between producer and consumer and government monopoly in infrastructure sector. The emerging digitization concept has altered this perception. The ascent of information and communication technology has given rise to e-commerce, e-banking, e-learning, e-medicine and e-governance. So, it is argued that government finds it increasingly difficult to cope up with technology-driven activities. Because of that Nowadays Education has turned out to be a commodity of international trade. It is no more a public good on domestic scale, but a private good on global scale. Globalization brings education to the front lines. In the prevailing discourse, education is expected to be the major tool for incorporation into the ‘knowledge society’ and the technological economy. In this paper we are going to see the impact of globalization on knowledge, education systems, and equity policies.

Key words: Globalisation, Indian Education, Knowledge, Society, Technology, Economy, Equity Policies, Digitization

Introduction

Over thousands of years, globalization has contributed to the progress of the world through travel, trade, migration, spread of cultural influences, and dissemination of knowledge and understanding. These global interrelations have often been very productive in the advancement of different countries. Globalization is viewed by somebody as westernization. But it is not so. The decimal system emerged and became well developed in India between the second and sixth centuries; it was used by Arab mathematicians soon thereafter.

These mathematical innovations reached Europe mainly in the last quarter of the tenth century and began having an impact in the early years of the last millennium, playing an important part in the scientific revolution that helped to transform Europe. The agents of globalization are neither European nor exclusively Western, nor are they necessarily linked to Western dominance. Indeed, Europe would have been a lot poorer-economically, culturally, and scientifically- had it resisted the globalization of mathematics, science, and technology at that time. And today, the same principle applies, though in the opposite direction (from West to East).

And Now, Initial enthusiasm for globalization as a beneficial set of processes has yielded to an understanding that the phenomenon is largely associated with increasing social inequality within and between countries as well as instability and conflict. So at this stage, it is necessary to find the impact of globalization on Indian Economy. Education is important not only for the full development of one’s personality, but also for the sustained growth of the nation. Education is an important investment in building human capital that is a driver for technological innovation and economic growth.

It is only through improving the educational status of a society that the multi-faceted development of its people can be ensured Basically Indian Education system is composed of three components and they are Primary education, Secondary education and Higher education. Today, in the age of privatization, globalization and liberalization, India is exposed to the world in all spheres. In the present competitive world, expansion, excellence and inclusion are the three challenges of Indian education system. The age old system of education has to be reformed. Practical knowledge should be given more priority than heoretical knowledge. Indian Education System Indian education has its own history of development. In the earlier times, Gurukulas dominated the society, which emphasized the traditional and cultural education, which had its own restriction. But Indian education system got an impetus after the invasion of the British. Western education exerted its influence on the Indian education system, under the British rule. McCauley’s education policy is worthy of note. Scientific and technological education gained more importance than traditional and cultural education in this era.

But in the post-independence period, our constitution made the education a fundamental right and enacted a law for compulsory education up to 14 years. Today higher education gives more importance to survival in this competitive world. Today is the age of privatization, globalization and liberalization. India is exposed to the world in all spheres. In the present competitive world, expansion, excellence and inclusion are the three challenges of Indian education system. The age old system of education has to be reformed. Practical knowledge should be given more priority than theoretical knowledge

Impact of Globalization on Indian Education

The education in India is at a crossroads. Its liberal and secular character and content, carefully nourished during the last fifty years, despite several vicissitudes, is now undergoing fundamental transformation. Trends in Global Education which affects the quality of education ? Dilution and trivialization of the aims of education ? Fragmentation and compartmentalization of education ? Alienation of knowledge from social ethos ? Restriction of access through commercialization, privatization and competitive screening ? Parallelization or hierarchical layering of school systems ?

Homogenization of socio- cultural diversities through increasing centralization The children of the poor and socially disadvantaged have been denied English medium school education. The rapid growth of the software development and electronic communications industries is one of the few achievements of Indian industry in post-independence India. Further, because of strong hold of the English language in MNCs and corporate circles, the divide between rural and urban is almost complete in the field of education.

In consequence, this great reservoir of skills and expertise offers the opportunity to utilize them for the spread of quality education through several technologies. Impact of Globalization on Indian Education Globalization process means in the context of Higher Education as a very competitive and deregulated educational system modeled after ‘free-market’ but with more pressure on it to assure that the future workers is prepared for some fluid jobs in the ‘free-market of 21st century’.

Further it means that educational system would provide the sites of struggle over the meaning and power of national identity and a national culture. Because of the commercialization, Educational sector has been more commonly described as, not service sector, but education industry. The free market philosophy has already entered the educational sphere in a big way. Commercialization of education is the order of the day. Commercial institutions offering specialized education have come up everywhere. In view of globalization, many corporate universities, both foreign and Indian, are encroaching upon our government institutions.

Once these institutions turn ‘self-financing’, their prices would be benchmarked against their global counterparts, which would be affordable to the same top layer of the society. As the job markets become acutely narrow, the polarization between the elite and non-elite would be clearly discernible. Meanwhile, various kinds of price barriers would be imposed to prevent the entry of the non-elite like the downtrodden and poor communities. Further, Corporatisation has transformed the education sector into an enterprise for profits.

Beyond a small group of elite institutions, few Indian institutions are globally accredited or recognized. Thus, the competition for a handful of elite institutions is severe. The Indian education system is not able to mobilize funds from its students at home. By some accounts, Indian students, whose fees are paid by their parents, have become a net subsidizer of British higher education; the largest number of foreign students in the US come from India, some 80,000; and there are even an estimated 5,000 Indian medical students in China.

Many of the best students go abroad. Globalization has made education an extraordinary business opportunity with a great impact on employment. In the current scenario, Universities from different parts of the world want to join hands with Indian Universities and be a part of India's lucrative economic strength. Partnership, Academic Exchanges, Joint Ventures, Research Collaboration, just about everything short of building a campus on Indian soil (illegal) are the ways in which Universities in the UK are seeking a stake in India.

Large Industrial Organizations like Tata’s, Reliance, Essars or the Associations like CII, FICCI, SIAM  ; ACMA   start the initiatives to start Institutes of Excellence throughout India with collaborations from Institutes like Harvard School of Business, MIT in USA ; London School of Economics   There are certain advantages in Recruiting Overseas Students like students will get international exposure and they will develop skills such as talking to industry, making presentations and dealing with senior managers. Recruiting Overseas students is a way of getting financial advantage for the universities.

Social Exclusion

The problems of Indian education center on financing, equity and excellence. As these problems have been confounded by rapid globalization that requires only educated manpower, the traditionally excluded social groups, which are way behind the advanced groups in their access to education, are now victims of a double whammy. In fact, the introduction of ‘cost recovery’ principles that results in a hike in fees contributes to reduction in the burden of the government in financing higher education. Further, privatization of higher education makes it expensive such that it is beyond the reach of lower income groups.

Inadequate income implies denial of opportunity of the benefits of higher education whereas the denial of access to higher education results in the lack of fair opportunities to improve income. The children of the poor and socially disadvantaged have been denied English medium school education. Decades of under-investment in education have created shocking shortages of buildings, laboratories, libraries, sanitary facilities and even drinking water and sanitation facilities in the nation’s decaying education sector especially in Government Schools.

The rapid growth of the software development and electronic communications industries is one of the few achievements of Indian industry in post-independence India. Further, because of strong hold of the English language in MNCs and corporate circles, the divide between rural and urban is almost complete in the field of education. In consequence, this great reservoir of skills and expertise offers the opportunity to utilize them for the spread of quality education through several technologies. Challenges posed by Globalization on Indian Education

In the world of unequal opportunities, idea and knowledge are the emerging factors that decide development or lack of it, education cannot be left entirely to market forces. Further, market needs should be kept in view while developing the curriculum. The element of productivity orientation should guide the formulation of curriculum framework. It is also necessary that while deciding about the fee structure and other student levies, the tendency towards commercialization of education should be guarded against.

Globalization poses challenges like

1. Faculty Shortage
2. Quality of education
3. Incentive structures

As the world moves on to forging an information society founded on education, India cannot remain behind as a non-competitive knowledge economy. India has to create an environment that does not produce industrial workers and labourers but fosters knowledge workers. Such people must be at the cutting edge of knowledge workers and, in turn, placing India in the vanguard in the information age.

This is not to argue that the opportunities opened up by information technology are to be shunned, but to suggest its creative incorporation in the system of education. At the same time it is necessary to recognize the fact that the educational conditions created by information technology are pregnant with the possibilities of intellectual colonization. The breaking of the geographical barriers and communication restrictions are indeed healthy attributes of knowledge dissemination, but it cannot be divorced rom the economic and political contexts of knowledge production Indian education system is one of the most tightly controlled in the world. The government regulates who you can teach, what you can teach them and what you can charge them. It also has huge regulatory bottlenecks. There are considerable entry barriers: Universities can be set up only through acts of legislation, approval procedures for starting new courses are cumbersome, syllabi revision is slow, and accreditation systems are extremely weak and arbitrary.

The regulators permit relatively little autonomy for institutions and variation amongst them. The shortage of quality institutions is a product of India’s regulatory structures. Increased public investment that the government has promised is absolutely necessary to increase access Quotas became a symbol of the state’s power over Indian education: its propensity to hoist its own purposes upon academic institutions regardless of their impact on the quality of these institutions.

Globalization requires two contradictory transformations in the state: On the one hand, successful globalization requires that the state invest heavily in increasing access to education. But in higher education, globalization also requires the state to respect the autonomy of institutions so that a diversity of experiments can find expression, so that institutions have the flexibility to do what it takes to retain talent in a globalized world and, above all, respond quickly to growing demand.

Globalization demands a paradigm shift in the regulation of higher education. In India the debate has only just begun. There is a mismatch between the supply and demand. As for Indian universities they function today without even the basic minimum facilities and with teachers who have no access to the latest advances in their disciplines. These institutions churn out students who complete their education as outcastes even in their own chosen area of knowledge. What these institutions offer is unacceptable to the fast growing affluent Indian middle class.

The situation is likely to aggravate in coming days with the UGC reportedly being deprived of its funding functions and the introduction of an accreditation system which would stamp many an institution as academic slums without ever the possibility of a honourable redemption. Understandably education is a fertile land for investment, particularly if it comes with a foreign tag. Conclusion The education system must ensure that students gain not just depth of knowledge in these subjects but a holistic perception and skills that will equip them to face the real world.

At every stage, there must be opportunities to expand their boundaries, platforms for collaboration and learning and recognition for those who strive to excel. Further, market needs should be kept in view while developing the curriculum. The element of productivity orientation should guide the formulation of curriculum framework. It is also necessary that while deciding about the fee structure and other student levies, the tendency towards commercialization of education should be guarded against.

India should decide about the nature and extent of globalization that can be constructively introduced in their socio-economic and educational systems. While it is difficult to resist the temptation of falling in line with the international community, it is necessary that while doing so, the paramountcy of national interests should be kept in view. This is more so in the field of education, which is intimately concerned with the development of human capital. Ultimately, any hasty involvement in the global educational market can end up in harming the vital interests of students, and particularly of poor and downtrodden for generations to come.

Proper regulatory mechanisms to be established to ensure that the universities, in particular the privately funded ones, do not end up exploiting students. Finally, it is about always trying to push the bar a little more, constantly innovating and never standing still. If the educational institutions believe in a value based education system, then their students will excel in all walks of life. At schools and colleges that believe in educational excellence, student enthusiasm and feedback is an important driver of change and evaluation.

They create a vibrant, student community that continually innovative and excels in all spheres from academics to arts and sports. Globalization is a never ending process and Developing countries like India should utilize this properly to improve their national standard through their education system.

Cite this Page

Who Are the Winners and Losers of Globalisation. (2017, Feb 25). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/who-are-the-winners-and-losers-of-globalisation/

copy to clipboard