The new Asian powers in the globalization process

The above 2015 editorial cartoon by Rodriguo De Matos entitled "China is out front" can be seen as a satirical warning to the USA that China is becoming a threat to US economic (and geopolitical?) domination. China, symbolized as a dragon in the colours of the Chinese flag, has beaten Japan (shown as a sumo wrestler turned into a ridiculous roast chicken by the dragon) economically. The dragon is pointing towards a small, fat (i.e. morally compromised?) and scared-looking Uncle Sam (symbol of the USA). The dragon threatens Uncle Sam: "You are next!", meaning that China intends to surpass the USA as an economic superpower.

Cf. pages 76 and 77 of your DNL textbook (Lesson 3).

The new Asian powers are: India, China, and South-East Asian nations like Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and the Philippines, plus China since the early 2000s. They are becoming more and more economically important and contribute largely to globalization. They are disrupting the balance of (economic) power (the dominance of the Triad is being undermined). Greater integration into a global economy, however, is not without consequences for these countries...

Documents 1 and 2 concern China and Singapore, two key players of the Asia Pacific region and of globalization.

Document 1 is an optimistic article from the New York Times which highlights the impact of the Chinese economy on that of the USA. The trade deficit of the USA (meaning the USA imports more than it exports) is greatly due to its import of cheap goods from Asia. The fact that China is now the dominant economic power of the region (even more than Japan) is, according to the journalist, actually beneficial to the US economy. Because China makes consumer products more cheaply than the USA, the USA actually makes savings by importing them from China (it would cost more to the USA if it made the goods itself). This makes China a privileged trade partner for the USA for goods such as shoes, toys, electronic and numerous other consumer goods. In fact, the USA trade deficit has actually gone down because it now trades with China rather than more expensive Asian countries (South Korea, Japan).

China’s economic growth since 1979 (and especially 2001 when it finally joined the WTO) has been staggering. It has become the “workshop of the world”, overtaking other Asian nations in the amount of goods produced and pushing prices down. This is good news for consumers but not for the less competitive nations.

The photo of Singapore harbour (document 2) shows one of the world’s biggest and most modern container port facilities. This harbour is a major global trade hub because it has been modernized and is strategically situated on major sea routes between Japan, China, South Korea and the Middle East, Europe and North America. The harbour facilities have made the city state very wealthy (9^th on the UN HDI 2013 list).

We see part of the modern harbour complex: it is clean, well-ordered and highly-mechanized. Freight is unloaded by giant cranes along the piers. The very numerous containers are stacked along the wharfs. In the middle-distance, close to the harbour, is the CBD (high-rise prestigious office blocks for the headquarters of merchant companies, banks, insurance companies, etc.).

The map (document 3) illustrates the fact that Asia has become the workshop of the globalized economy. It shows where the various activities of Seagate Technology, an American TNC, are situated. Though its Registered Office is actually in a fiscal paradise on the Cayman Islands (which allows it to pay less taxes), the headquarters of Seagate (where the company’s executives and research staff are) is in the TNC’s “home” country (USA). Most of the actual production of the hard drives it makes takes place “offshore” in Asian countries where labour is as qualified but cheaper than in the USA.

Document 4 is an extract from a 2006 The Guardian newspaper article. In it, the journalist explains that the spectacular economic growth in Asia has resulted, unexpectedly, in unemployment and inequality. This is because many (young) people leave the countryside to work in the factories, hoping for better wages, but the demand for jobs has grown faster than the number of jobs available. The result is increased competition for jobs (and so greater job insecurity, unemployment, and poorer working conditions) as well as increased food insecurity in the countryside.

The fact that Chinese production costs are the lowest (though this is likely to change) means that companies move production to China away from other countries of the region, resulting in rising unemployment in those Asia-Pacific countries.

Conclusion

Asian countries, notably China since it adopted “state capitalism”, have become an essential component of the globalized economy, providing cheap and abundant labour for the TNCs and goods for the world via an efficient system of maritime transport (to the benefit of coastal cities like Hong Kong and Singapore that have invested in modern harbour facilities). However, the economic boom has not spared Asia from the problems inherent to globalization and from the risks involved in becoming dependent on a world-wide economic system.

Does inequality undermine growth?

A cartoon disparaging anti-globalization 

> Click HERE to read an article in THE DAY!

Globalisation: a vulnerable process creating economic growth

Cf. Lesson 2 (pages 74 and 75) of your textbook

Comments on the cartoon above: The cartoonist has chosen to show globalization (and the system of free trade it depends on) as a big machine, controlled by capitalists, moving relentlessly forward, over-exploiting natural and human resources in order to produce unnecessary goods to increase wealth (for the capitalists), and causing environmental destruction in the process. The "machine" seems unstoppable, but it will stop if the natural resources run out (or the planet becomes unlivable)... Globalization is not an unstopable process; it is "vulnerable".

The title of Lesson 2 describes globalization as “vulnerable”, meaning that it can be slowed down by events happening in the world (wars, terrorism, natural disasters, increasing costs of natural resources), and that it is facing increasing opposition.

Globalization creates economic growth with new products and new markets. But, the process has not, so far, got rid of poverty (some accuse it of actually causing the widening gap between rich and poor).

Globalization appears to offer more opportunities for the already wealthy MEDCs (more economically developed countries) than for the LEDCs (less economically developed countries) where it is seen as a threat to development.

Comments on document 1: Globalization, growth and poverty: building an inclusive world economy

This graph uses the following criteria: emigration to the USA, % of the world’s GDP that the export of merchandise represents, and Foreign Direct Investment in developing countries (i.e. how much capital rich countries invested in developing countries) to show that globalization since the 1870s has not progressed at an even pace since it is affected by factors such as world events, agreements on trade, and progress in the means of transport.

There have been three “waves” of globalization:

1870 to 1914: The first wave was the “golden age” of globalization, with increased international trade (due to falling costs of transport), free flow of capital (massive investments in colonies), mass emigration (mostly to the USA).

(1914 to 1939: globalization was halted during the First World War and the Great Depression: very little emigration, a down-turn in trade (there were high trade tariffs) and foreign investment.)

1945 to 1979: Second wave of globalization, due to liberalization of trade between North America, Europe and Japan. Most former colonies chose not to take part in it (preferring to produce their own goods rather than importing them). The shipping container and jet travel made transport much cheaper. Restrictions on immigrants were only slowly lifted. Capital flows between rich countries were restricted up until 1971, when the Bretton Woods system (which fixed exchange rates between major currencies) ended.

1980s to today: Third wave of globalization, with increased participation of developing countries (China open-up to the market economy in 1979 and India in 1991). China is today the “workshop of the world” and the biggest exporter. Thanks to Internet, services on a world scale have increased. Outsourcing and offshoring have become the norm. Increased immigration means that the percentage of foreign-born citizens in the USA is now about 13% of the total (the same as in 1913).

The “highs and lows” of globalization are determined by world events (such as the world wars), international agreements, progress in transport and communication, and by US hegemony since the start of the 20^th century (its economy, foreign policy, immigration policies).

Comments on document 2: Worldwide business: the New York Stock Exchange

NYSE is the biggest stock exchange. All global cities have similar financial centres; it is one of the defining features of a megalopolis. The display panels show the Dow Jones index (i.e. of the value of the 30 biggest firms of the USA), the NASDAQ (National Association of Security Dealers Automated Quotations), an index which measures the strength (performance) of shares in businesses which are part of NASDAQ. Both the Dow Jones and NASDAQ measure the strength of the USA and world economy. Financial markets are more and more contested because some see them as part of the cause of the economic downturn which started in 2007 (cf. the Occupy Wall Street movement).

Comments on document 3: Anti-globalisation activists: “Africa is not for sale!”

Cancun is in Mexico. The WTO met there in 2003 for important trade talks. Poorer countries wanted to talk about increasing access to the world market in agricultural products for their products, and about the subsidies accorded farmers of the EU and the US by their governments. The talks failed.

“Africa is not for sale” is a slogan that was shouted by some African anti-globalization protesters during the talks (it is probably what the man in the photo is shouting). The meaning is: Africa is not just merchandise to be sold off by the powerful countries of the world to other wealthy countries of the world (i.e. Africa belongs to the Africans and it is where they live and work; the resources of Africa should belong to the Africans themselves). The banner (streamer) being held up by the man shaking his fist in anger says clearly that Africans should resist the WTO’s liberalization of the world’s economy. Note the slogan on the back of the Tee-shirt of the woman on the banner: “Our world is not for sale”; the meaning is: ordinary people should be able to access the world’s resources and not have them “stolen” by the wealthy (transnational corporations).

What is alter/anti-globalization?

It is a loosely-structured social movement that opposes the negative effects of economic globalization, and supports cooperation between the peoples of the world, environmental and climate protection, economic justice, labor protection, protection of indigenous cultures, human rights. According to anti-globalization activists, the victims of globalization are the poor in Latin America, Asia, and especially Africa. And the WTO is partly to blame. The poor in developed countries (the “4th world”) suffer too from globalization.

A few alter/anti-globalization associations:

• ATTAC (Association pour la Taxation des Transactions financière et l'Aide aux Citoyens), set up in 1998 in France, it is now an international association.
• People’s Global Action, since 1998, international coordinating body for anti-capitalist actions.
• Via Campesina, since 1999, international coalition of peasant organizations advocating sustainable agriculture.
• Fairtrade International, set up in 2004 to promote partnerships between consumers and producers.
• Oxfam International, set up in 1995 by a group of independent non-governmental organizations to reduce poverty and injustice. Oxfam claims that the combined wealth of the richest 1 percent is greater than that of the other 99 percent of people of the world... Cf. Oxfam

An aspect of the work of many other NGOs (Oxfam, CAFOD, etc.) is campaigning against globalization and promoting alternatives to it like Fair Trade (a market-based approach that promotes sustainability and better trading conditions for producers in developing countries).

Comments on document 4: The new division of labour and its repercussions

The “new international division of labour” means that low-qualified workers in developing countries will be used by transnational firms to make their goods cheaply (since the labour force is cheap and plentiful), while high-qualified workers and managers will remain in developed countries. Electrolux (which produces 25% of the world’s household electric appliances) is a typical multinational in that it needs “to move production to other countries to be competitive”, i.e. to Eastern Europe, Mexico and Asia where the workforce is cheaper. The consequence of this on low-qualified workers in wealthy countries is unemployment.

Globalization implies outsourcing (“délocalisation” in French) by companies (also described as offshoring), that is: the relocation by a company of an operational process, such as manufacturing, or supporting processes, such as accounting, to another country.

Offshoring fosters an imbalance in the division of the labour force: qualified personnel in the North, low-skilled workers in the South.

The “law of supply and demand” means in fact that people in the North want a product as cheaply as possible; in order to satisfy our demand for cheap goods, firms (which compete with each other) have to find the cheapest means of supplying these goods and they do so by offshoring to where the cost of production is lowest, i.e. in the South. This fosters an imbalance between North and South in that poor workers are in the South, and rich consumers in the North.

Flows, circulation and connections on a global scale

Cf. pages 72-73 of your DNL textbook (Lesson 1):

Champion of the Seas

Brief and selective history of globalization (cf. document 1 of your textbook):

3^rd millennium BC: trade links between Sumer and the Indus Valley, also the Egyptians traded spices with the Middle East;

6^th century BC: the Greeks start to found colonies;

4^th century BC to 5^th century AD: the Roman Empire;

2^nd century BC: the Silk Route from China to the Mediterranean traced (click HERE!);

1295: Marco Polo returns to Venice after a long sojourn in China, laden with silk and jewels and tales of the fabulous wealth of the Orient. His exploits rekindle a long-dormant interest in trade between Europe and the East;

1492: Christopher Columbus discovers America;

16^th and 17^th centuries: rise of Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch and British maritime empires;

1600: the British East India Company, the first multinational corporation, was founded (the Dutch East India Company was set up in 1602);

1854: Donald McKay's Boston yard launches fast sail ships;

19^th century: the transport revolution (rail, steamships, and canals) allowed more goods to be transported quicker and further so that they became cheaper, more diverse and plentiful. The transport revolution, industrialization, and colonization encouraged the creation of many companies with interests throughout the world (dominated by the British);

1914: the outbreak of World War I ends the first great age of globalization, when trade and international investment had boomed;

1947: creation of the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), a multilateral agreement to reduce barriers to international trade;

1948: the Marshall plan helps Europe rebuilt and creates dependency on the USA;

1950s onwards: start of the reign of the multinational firms and of free trade on an international scale (except for countries under control of the Soviet Union);

1956: Malcom McLean developed the shipping container which revolutionized international transport;

1970: Boeing 747 jumbo jet makes intercontinental air travel accessible to a mass market;

1980s: improved telecommunications networks (start of Internet);

1991: collapse of the Soviet Union, the USA becomes the hyper power and the free market spreads to all parts of the planet;

1995: the GATT is replaced by the WTO (World Trade Organization);

1999: riots at the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle signal a backlash against free trade;

2001: China joins the WTO, hence integrating its economy into international trading patterns;

2007: start of the Great Recession;

2012: Russian Federation joins the WTO.

Comments on document 2 (Purchasing and manufacturing globally: Toyota):

TNCs are the driving force of globalization, its main vector. Toyota is (like Ikea) a good example of a multinational firm. This text, from the company’s website, explains its successful strategy.

Toyota Motors is a Japanese firm set up in 1933. It has been a multinational corporation since the 1950s (“corporation” means a group of people authorized by law to act as a legal personality and having its own powers, duties and liabilities). Toyota is based (has its headquarters) in Toyota City, Japan, and its production plants in 26 countries.

Toyota Motors is today one of the biggest car manufacturers in the world. There is wide-spread diffusion (it sells in 170 countries) of its mass-produced vehicles. According to the text, which obviously presents the firm in a positive light, Toyota’s strength is due to its knowledge of its clients’ needs all over the world. It produces all over the world, non-stop, and adapts its products to local needs using local labour and materials. Its managers are Japanese and the firm has been able to make local personnel adapt to its production and management methods (the Japanese managers have intercultural management skills).

Comments on document 3 (map of The world archipelago):

This map shows the major transport routes for worldwide trade.

The word “archipelago” is used to describe the continents as if they were part of a group of interdependent “islands”, the suppliers and consumers of the different countries united by globalization. It is a way of describing a world that is highly interconnected and interdependent though trade.

An “oligopoly” is a market in which control of a commodity is in the hands of a small number of businesses which can influence prices and affect weaker competitors. It describes the countries of the Triad (the USA, Western Europe, Japan).

The map shows exchange of goods by air (air freight) and sea routes; exchange is mainly between the Triad regions.

Petrol tankers, giant container and cargo ships go towards Japan and China, and around Africa towards Europe, and to North America from Europe and the Far East.

Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Osaka, etc. are major ports. There are major ports in Europe and the USA. Ports are where most exchange takes place. The Panama and Suez canals are strategic areas, as are the Straits of Hormuz, Malacca and Magellan, and the Mozambique Channel.

The megalopolises are transport hubs (i.e. major centres of transport networks).

Comments on document 4 (Bollywood out to conquer the world):

The poster advertising a Bollywood film poster exhibition illustrates the globalization of culture.

Mumbai (previously called Bombay) is in India. It is the city in which many films are produced (more than in Hollywood, USA). The films produced in Mumbai are called “Bollywood” movies (mixture of the words “Bombay” and “Hollywood”). They are mostly watched in Asia and Africa, but are also becoming popular in other parts of the world (not just because of the expatriate Asian communities).

Films are a powerful means of spreading cultural models throughout the world. The growing popularity of films from India proves that Western cultural products do not entirely dominate the world.

“Slumdog Millionaire” is a British film set in India inspired by Bollywood-style cinema; it won the 2009 Best Picture Oscar.

Globalization maps

Click HERE!

Map: "A globalized world"

Cf. page 71 of your textbook.

Description (what does the map show?):

This thematic (economic and political) map, dated 2005, shows the relative economic importance of the world’s countries, the principal flows of wealth and knowledge, principal oil fields, war zones, and regional integrating associations.

Features of the KEY, explained:

• The Triad: USA, Japan, Europe are the members of the Triad (aka the oligopoly); they are the most powerful regions of the world economically.
• The hyperpower: the USA, it dominates at all levels the rest of the world.
• The other two powers: Japan and Europe, major economic powers but politically weaker than the USA.
• Developed countries associated to the Triad: Canada, Australia, New Zealand are part of the “Anglosphere” and have highly developed economies closely integrated into the globalized economy.
• Emerging countries: the economies of Brazil (and other Latin American countries), India, China, South Africa are becoming powerful and challenge the dominant position of the Triad members.
• Asian dragons: Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea have had a spectacular development in the last thirty years.
• Countries in reconstruction: former Soviet Bloc countries that, since the 1990s, are trying to adapt to a free-market economy.
• Countries integrated within globalization: North America, most of South East Asia, parts of the Middle East and North Africa, Venezuela (plus, though not indicated as such: the Triad, developed countries associated to the Triad, BRICS and Asian Dragons).
• Developing countries: countries, slowly evolving economically, in Africa, Central Asia, South America and the Middle East.
• Least Developed Countries (LDCs): the poorest countries, most African countries, plus Yemen, Afghanistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Butan, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Haiti.
• Fourth World: poor people in wealthy countries (everywhere).
• Countries at war: Nepal, Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Ethiopia, Sudan, Chad, DR Congo, Côte d’Voire, Columbia, these are mostly very poor countries.
• Blind spot: of no interest geopolitically or economically (few people).
• Main oil resources: the world economy depends on this natural resource, mostly controlled by powerful multinational companies from the North. Oil fields indicated: North Sea, Russia, Middle East, North and West Africa, Venezuela, Ecuador, Mexico, USA, Indonesia.
• Major flows of investments, goods and information: major flows between the members of the Triad (thick arrows), less important flows between Japan, China and South East Asia (thinner arrows).
• Global cities: Tokyo, New York, Chicago, Washington D.C., New York, Los Angeles, London, Paris, are the “motors” of globalization and are very important at all levels. They concentrate activity, people, transport hubs, decision-making organizations.
• Main megalopolises (megalopolises are chains of roughly adjacent metropolitan areas): the Boston to Washington Corridor in the USA, and the Tokaido Corridor (in Japan), are shown. These are the most powerful, wealthy and populous regions of the world. They are linked to each other, forming a world-wide network of exchange of goods, etc.
• Main integrating associations: enable regional cooperation and free trade among its members, and promote globalization whilst defending the interests of their members.
• European Union: the EU has 28 members (most of Europe), it is an economic and political association.
• NAFTA: North American Free Trade Agreement
• MERCOSUR: Southern Common Market (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela, Chile, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru)
• ASEAN: Association of Southeast Asian Nations

Explaining the map (what is the purpose of the map?):

• The map attempts to describe both the process of globalization, i.e. flows of goods, etc., and possible consequences: increasing integration, and perhaps poverty and war. The major flows of investment, capital, goods, and information take place mainly between the Triad members and there are countries (associated, integrated, emerging, in reconstruction, developing) that depend to a greater or lesser extent on this Triad. There are poor regions that are more or less excluded from globalization (even perhaps victims of it, cf. countries at war). The oil reserves in Africa do not appear to benefit the countries in which they are situated…
• The map, by showing global cities and megalopolises reminds us that they are essential in the globalization process.
• The regional integrating associations both slow down globalization by defending regional interests and enable it because the member states of these associations promote free markets.
• Note that the map does not show population flows (North-North, South-North, South-South) though they are an integral part (economic migration) and consequence of (refugees) the globalization process.

Questions the map poses:

• To what extent does globalization achieve equitable work and wealth creation/distribution? The oligopoly has been described as a “world archipelago” where the metropolises of Japan, the USA and Europe, linked by the world’s main transport routes and means of telecommunication, act as if the rest of the world were unimportant (useful only for cheap labour, natural resources, land, and potential secondary markets). Since the 1990s, this model has become less relevant as the BRICS and other countries gain economic importance. The question still remains though: does globalization reinforce divisions between the regions of the world, favouring wealthy countries at the expense of poorer ones, or does it attenuated these divisions?
• Is the map still valid in 2015? China is now the world’s second most powerful economy. There are wars and tensions and civil strife (over control of resources, of geopolitical influence,) in different places. Since 9/11 and the start of the Great Recession in 2007, the USA’s dominant position, economically and politically, is undermined and wealth disparities within countries and in the world have been accentuated.

Spreading the European model to Asia...

IKEA store in Shanghai, China

Cf. page 71 of your textbook.

The above photo illustrates the spread of the "European model" to Asia and the opening-up of China economically and culturally (though not politically); wealthier Chinese can now buy Western consumer goods and adopt Western ways of living. The result is a hybridisation (westernisation) of local culture. Chinese people, by buying Western goods, "buy into", to some extent, the Western lifestyle and the values that underpin it.

Ikea is a multinational corporation (aka MNF or multinational firm), created in 1943, with its headquarters in Sweden, its financial branch in the Netherlands, and some of its production facilities in China. It makes and sells (in over 200 stores worldwide) cheap but well-made DIY furniture and home decoration. Its brand name is famous. It is a firm which prides itself on having a strong ethical code...

What is a multinational corporation?

Definition by the Farlex Financial Dictionary: "It is corporation that maintains assets and/or operations in more than one country. A multinational corporation often has a long supply chain that may, for example, require the acquisition of raw materials in one country, a product's manufacture in a second country, and its retail sale in a third country. A multinational often globally manages its operations from a main office in its home country. Multinational corporations are controversial among groups such as environmentalists and worker advocates, who claim that multinationals exploit resources and employees. On the other hand, proponents argue that multinationals create wealth in every country where they operate, which ultimately benefits workers as well as shareholders".

Two-thirds of world trade is now controlled by the 60,000+ multinational corporations. They control the production and distribution of food, furniture, cars, luxury items, films, energy, chemicals, medical goods, electronic goods, and other consumer products, raw materials, construction, services such as telephone networks or banks and insurance, etc.

They more or less impose their goods, services, production and management methods in every region of the world, most easily within the less powerful nations. People in the emerging countries do not necessarily benefit from their presence, but their lifestyles and values are inevitably influenced by them, especially the rising middle class.

MNFs wield a strong social and cultural influence, and the bigger MNFs are also extremely powerful economically and politically. They act in the interests of their shareholders, which are not necessarily compatible with the interests of governments, people, or smaller businesses... Many MNFs it seems elaborate international strategies with less and less regard for the customs and laws of particular countries (investing in countries that present the "least resistance")...

To optimise profits, MNFs need to standardize a product (make it the same) in order to make it easier and cheaper to produce. Also, MNFs have to promote their goods to as big a market as possible. They face the problem of creating demand in foreign markets. So, in order to sell as many standardized products to as many consumers as possible, the marketing strategy of firms puts the emphasis on the "exoticism" of the product (the strange Swedish foods in Ikea stores for example) or on its perceived foreign-designed/made superior quality (like "Made in Germany" or the Apple products). Sometimes, minor concessions are made to local customs (no beef in Indian Mcdonald's hamburgers, or the different styling of a car depending on which country it is being sold to). Often, a product sells well because the product is perceived as cheap, or useful. Some MNFs have a virtual monopoly on certain products or services (Chinese toys or electronic products, or Google for example) which means that they can sell their products easily. The standardization and internationalization of products results in people (especially the young and affluent) having ever more similar lifestyles all over the world, with materialistic and individualistic values becoming the norm.

The fact that MNFs are, by definition, international (products designed in one place, produced in a number of other places, with headquarters in a "home country" but with its financial services in another, etc.) means that products and services are less and less identified with a particular country. 

Globalization, a world of difference?

Comment on the cartoon: Globalisation is shown as an oversized, dangerous-looking boxer (“BIZ” means “big business”). Localism is represented as a small, weak, surprised-looking boxer. “Localism” concerns small-scale economy and participatory democracy (i.e. it is the opposite of globalization). The referee is warning the "localism" boxer (!) that he, the referee, wants a fair fight (i.e. no cheating). Ebert is being ironic since the smaller boxer has no chance of victory; the fight (between the forces of globalisation and localism), in other words, is rigged in favour of big business. The cartoonist in fact considers that the real threat comes from globalization, not from people who oppose it. He is mocking those (i.e. the powerful) who cannot stand any criticism of globalization... The figure of the referee can be seen as embodying the various organizations that promote free trade in the world (the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the European Union, etc.); the cartoonist is saying that this "referee" is promoting globalisation at the expense of localism (the referee is corrupt).

Cf. page 70 of your textbook (Terminale, Classes Européennes, History Geography, Hatier).

"Globalization, a world of difference?" This is a great chapter title, rich in meaning! Let’s analyse it (i.e. what does this title mean and what questions does it inspire?).

We need to define the terms of the title, namely: “globalization”, “world”, and “difference”. Then we need to understand how the expression “a world of difference” is used.

First term: “globalization”. Here is a simple definition (learn it by heart!):

Globalization is the intensification of movement of people, goods, money, and information on a world scale (“intensification” means more, and more quickly). Globalization has intensified especially since the 1980s. This process has created an unprecedented world-wide economic, political and cultural space (that is far from being unified however!). It is the extension of the free-market (aka liberal or neoliberal or "laissez-faire") economic model to the whole planet. Globalization includes everybody (but, so far, to various degrees), everywhere on the planet, all the time.

The neo-liberal economic model means: competitive, profit-oriented business based on private ownership of the means of production, with minimal State intervention and the suppression of trade barriers.

Then: what is meant by “world”? That’s easy: the whole planet (its various human populations and how they interact plus the resources and ecosystems on which we depend).

Then: what is meant by “difference”? It means, simply: “not the same” (as others, as before), and it also means “significant change” (from a previous situation).

So, “a world of difference”, if read positively, implies that the situation in the world has undergone significant change for the better thanks to globalization. In other words: globalization has made “a world of difference” (from the common expression: "Oh, that makes a world of difference!"), i.e. it is a positive, constructive process which aims to improve the world (through wealth-creation for all). This is the neoliberal discourse or justification, for the process of globalization. Globalization makes a positive difference to the world...

However, “a world of difference” can also be read rather negatively: does globalization only exist because of differences in the world? I mean: do multinational companies not depend on the exploitation of poor countries to make profits (using the cheap labour in those countries and exploiting their resources)? The “difference” of the title is the difference between rich and poor regions of the world. Globalization depends on differences in the world...

Maybe world-wide capitalism even creates differences (literally creating a “world of differences”), in which case globalization is less about intensifying exchange in order to unify the world (in a common economic, political and socio-cultural system) but more about increasing the profits of the companies based in the wealthy and powerful countries at the expense of the poor... This is a world of disparities, of unfair differences, i.e. the rich and powerful against the poor and powerless. This is the anti-globalisation discourse against the globalisation process. Globalization creates differences in the world...

When trying to understand globalization, we need to find answers to the following questions:

• When and where did it start (cf. “Key question” of your textbook)?
• Why does it continue and how will it evolve (cf. "Key question")?
• Who promotes/benefits from it (cf. "Key question")?
• How does it affect the people and the planet?
• What is the ultimate aim of globalization, is it inevitable, and is it “a good thing” (should we accept it, can it be opposed)?