Abstract
The topic of this paper is globalization issue. This research argues that impact of the globalization is bad for developing countries. This essay is about how globalization can threaten and endanger the entire world, especially on environment and natural resource, public health, tradition and culture, and sovereignty issue. The poison of globalization can be removed in three ways that include establishing a supranational government organization, creating a communication and using antitrust.
Globalization Issue:
Globalization is Poison for Developing Countries
Globalization is Poison for Developing Countries
Two men return from a vacation in Shawnee National Forest. They meet a friend and immediately start complaining: “The food was terrible,” the first man says, “I think they were trying to poison us.” The second man adds, “Yes, and the portions were so small.” That is my opinion on globalization: the portions are small, and they are poisonous. This is not to make light of the very real gains that have come with globalization. According to Webster's Dictionary Online define globalization as “the development of an increasingly which integrated global economy marked especially by free trade, free flow of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor markets”(globalization, n.d., para 1). Besides, according to “Making Globalization Work” claimed that “Globalization is a double-edged tool. We can take advantage of it with sound national strategies designed to increase the well-being of our citizens, or we can fold our arms and do nothing and allow globalization to take advantage of us” (“Making Globalization Work”, 2003, para2). For example, globalization creates new markets and wealth and businessmen delight in a thing and never get tired of it, hence many politicians, academics, and journalists treat these trends as both inevitable and on the whole welcome. But for billions of the world people, business-driven globalization means uprooting old ways of life and threatening livelihoods and cultures. In fact, globalization invaded the entire world, especially in developing countries.
The past two decades has witnessed an increasingly rapid tendency toward globalization in the world economy, and this has significantly affected the comparative advantage and international competitiveness of nations. Indeed, globalization also has made the world more interdependent than ever. Multinational corporations manufacture products in many countries and sell to consumers around the world. Advanced countries business and industries face increasing competition from the top of developing countries companies such as Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore and China that have captured a share of the market with cheap products, thanks to low domestic wage rates. For this reason, developed countries –America, United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan– companies hoping to withstand foreign competition were go to developing countries. However, John Manzella, publisher and an internationally recognized expert on trade and globalization, stated “due to successful efforts to lower global barriers, international trade and investment have become a primary engine of world growth. And growth is responsible for reducing poverty. But in fact, studies indicate that developing countries with open economies grew by approximately 5% a year in the 1970s and 1980s, while those with closed economies grew less than 1% annually”(2002, para. 2). That is mean globalization just balance the economies of the world from wealth places to poor areas and didn’t create the extra wealth of the world. At the same time, he also pointed out “globalization has had negative consequences on some developing countries“(para. 9).
According to Stuart Smith (1998) in his article” The Impact of Globalization on Sovereignty and the Environment,” pointed out that “the globalization of market has certainly had an impact on the ability of nation-states to control externalities such as environment, ethics, labor practices, working conditions, and human right etc. These externalities are no monetary values (p. 263); consequently, this disadvantage led to the unparalleled growth and the now unopposed victory of the market system. There is no question that the movement to the market economy throughout the world and the globalization of markets has led to the greatest good for the greatest number. Nevertheless, the most important consequence of globalization is the fact that supranational government organizations cannot yet match the power of supranational firms. For example, advanced countries companies are moving to developing countries to avoid tough enforcement of environmental laws and resources restricted distribution. Individual governments difficult to set standard for these externalities and companies are easily able to leap over any particular rule by globalization market. As this result, globalization changes from panacea to poison at once in the whole world, developing countries especially. This research agrees with Mr. Smith’s opinion because the serious bad influence of globalization on sovereignty and the environment of low wage areas are self-evident. Moreover, this research claims that the globalization market affects the ability of developing countries to control externalities specifically on environment and natural resource, public health, tradition and culture, and sovereignty.
The most serious Impact of globalization is on the environment and natural resource of developing countries because globalization directly harm developing countries environment and squeeze their natural resource without limits. Since globalization has greatly reduced poverty throughout the world via development, and meantime the abominable businessmen gained a lot of profit from developing countries whom delighted in globalization and never get tired of it. In addition, poor countries are easy to get into debt and than suffer at the mercy of this irresistible force because some developing countries have lots of deficits and they need finance support by foreign films and advanced countries. The powerful companies soon began to predominate over them with the bait of huge money. Usually, the needy countries couldn't resist the lure of money. As a consequence, the conquerors plundered their resource and trampled on sovereignty and environment that common occurrence. In “Report Says Globalization May Work in Favor of Environment” stated that “an upsurge of trade and investment in natural resources sectors such as forestry, mining and petroleum development is threatening the health of the world's sensitive ecosystems. The world's leading biologists have reported that the loss of living species in recent decades represents the largest mass extinction since the dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago. In addition, the rapid growth in the movement of human beings and their goods and services has provided convenient transportation for thousands of alien species of plants and animals to take root on foreign shores. International commerce is a potent mechanism through which hazardous products and technologies move around the world” (2000, p1). For this reason, powerful organization such as World Trade Organization (WTO) should set up the international policies and institutions needed to ensure that the world economy of the 21st century without destroying the environment and overusing natural resource.
One more argument from public health issue is that globalization threatens fiercely to public health far greater than developing countries have benefited greatly in public health by increased trade, improved technology, and respected human rights. Some of the negative aspects of globalization had serious impact to public health. In other words, the more interconnection make the more sufferers. In Derek Yach’s article, professor and head of division of global health, “The Globalization of Public Health, I: Threats and Opportunities” he stated that ”The domain of globalization includes many interconnected phenomena and risk that affect the sustainability of health systems and the well-being of the populations of both developing and industrialized countries”(1998, p2). For example, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a viral respiratory illness. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that “SARS was first reported in Asia in February 2003. Over the next few months, the illness spread to more than two dozen countries in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia before the SARS global outbreak of 2003 was contained” (Basic Information About SARS, 2005, para. 1). As this result, the World Health Organization (WHO) should promote the public health policies of international to prevent the fatal contagious diseases.
A third claim is that notwithstanding developing countries trying doing their best to keep up the nation-states traditions and cultures, globalization wiping off intensely. In fact, it is obvious how bad of globalization will impact on tradition or culture. Because foreign influences still destroy the good of ways of life violently. According to Mohammed Moussalli (2003) in his article “impact of globalization” claimed that ”Cultural invasion of globalization will lead to the disintegration of identity and the spirit of culture.(para.5) For example, there have lots of the fast food restaurants and foreign restaurants in Taiwan, such as McDonald, KFC, japans’ food, and Korean food. They led the many Taiwanese to changed diet behavior and culture. Besides, young people pent lot of money and time to follow the fashion of foreign countries, and discarded old beliefs. Thus many Taiwanese worry about the Americanization of their country, seeing the use the U.S. style. Thus, every country should pay attention to this problem and prevent to lose good tradition and culture.
The fourth argument at government issue is that globalization endangers developing countries’ sovereignty. The poor countries were unable to resist the canvasses and persuades from greedy businessmen of advanced countries who buy large amounts of that debt and to do a lot of portfolio investment and even create factories. Some countries and companies want to interfere or demand in the internal affairs of other countries in order to earn maximum Profit. In fact, these actions were interpreted as a threat to national sovereignty. Besides, an interesting side-effect of globalization on weaker nation-states is that governments sacrifice the power, resource and right of human in order to compete with others countries to attract industry and investment. Stuart Smith (1998) also claimed that “the real power of nation-states has been greatly diminished …They need to please investors, whose supply of loyalty is pretty close to zero.” (p.2). As a result, no any supranational government organizations could match up the power of supranational firms. Indeed, the powerful films or countries seized the chance of disparity to persecute externalities of developing countries. Every country should have the right to self-government in order to ensure national peace, equality and freedom. Hence, government of developing countries should careful about this issue and resist the invasion of greedy merchants.
In conclusion, globalization is double faced, one promising and the other threatening. Based on the argument of above-mentioned, the poisons of globalization seem to outweigh the delicacies of globalization. Up to the present globalization was still threatening the entire world, particularly on the environmental problem, public healthful topic, cultural invasion, and governmental right of the developing countries. Therefore, developing countries should pick out the danger of globalization. The poison of globalization can be removed in a number of ways. First, we should establish a supranational government organization to contend with this enigma. Second, we should create a communication platform to know where poison is and where delicacy is. Finally, individual could curtail supranational firms’ powers by antitrust. Thus market and externalities will approach to win- win situation.
The past two decades has witnessed an increasingly rapid tendency toward globalization in the world economy, and this has significantly affected the comparative advantage and international competitiveness of nations. Indeed, globalization also has made the world more interdependent than ever. Multinational corporations manufacture products in many countries and sell to consumers around the world. Advanced countries business and industries face increasing competition from the top of developing countries companies such as Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore and China that have captured a share of the market with cheap products, thanks to low domestic wage rates. For this reason, developed countries –America, United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan– companies hoping to withstand foreign competition were go to developing countries. However, John Manzella, publisher and an internationally recognized expert on trade and globalization, stated “due to successful efforts to lower global barriers, international trade and investment have become a primary engine of world growth. And growth is responsible for reducing poverty. But in fact, studies indicate that developing countries with open economies grew by approximately 5% a year in the 1970s and 1980s, while those with closed economies grew less than 1% annually”(2002, para. 2). That is mean globalization just balance the economies of the world from wealth places to poor areas and didn’t create the extra wealth of the world. At the same time, he also pointed out “globalization has had negative consequences on some developing countries“(para. 9).
According to Stuart Smith (1998) in his article” The Impact of Globalization on Sovereignty and the Environment,” pointed out that “the globalization of market has certainly had an impact on the ability of nation-states to control externalities such as environment, ethics, labor practices, working conditions, and human right etc. These externalities are no monetary values (p. 263); consequently, this disadvantage led to the unparalleled growth and the now unopposed victory of the market system. There is no question that the movement to the market economy throughout the world and the globalization of markets has led to the greatest good for the greatest number. Nevertheless, the most important consequence of globalization is the fact that supranational government organizations cannot yet match the power of supranational firms. For example, advanced countries companies are moving to developing countries to avoid tough enforcement of environmental laws and resources restricted distribution. Individual governments difficult to set standard for these externalities and companies are easily able to leap over any particular rule by globalization market. As this result, globalization changes from panacea to poison at once in the whole world, developing countries especially. This research agrees with Mr. Smith’s opinion because the serious bad influence of globalization on sovereignty and the environment of low wage areas are self-evident. Moreover, this research claims that the globalization market affects the ability of developing countries to control externalities specifically on environment and natural resource, public health, tradition and culture, and sovereignty.
The most serious Impact of globalization is on the environment and natural resource of developing countries because globalization directly harm developing countries environment and squeeze their natural resource without limits. Since globalization has greatly reduced poverty throughout the world via development, and meantime the abominable businessmen gained a lot of profit from developing countries whom delighted in globalization and never get tired of it. In addition, poor countries are easy to get into debt and than suffer at the mercy of this irresistible force because some developing countries have lots of deficits and they need finance support by foreign films and advanced countries. The powerful companies soon began to predominate over them with the bait of huge money. Usually, the needy countries couldn't resist the lure of money. As a consequence, the conquerors plundered their resource and trampled on sovereignty and environment that common occurrence. In “Report Says Globalization May Work in Favor of Environment” stated that “an upsurge of trade and investment in natural resources sectors such as forestry, mining and petroleum development is threatening the health of the world's sensitive ecosystems. The world's leading biologists have reported that the loss of living species in recent decades represents the largest mass extinction since the dinosaurs were wiped out 65 million years ago. In addition, the rapid growth in the movement of human beings and their goods and services has provided convenient transportation for thousands of alien species of plants and animals to take root on foreign shores. International commerce is a potent mechanism through which hazardous products and technologies move around the world” (2000, p1). For this reason, powerful organization such as World Trade Organization (WTO) should set up the international policies and institutions needed to ensure that the world economy of the 21st century without destroying the environment and overusing natural resource.
One more argument from public health issue is that globalization threatens fiercely to public health far greater than developing countries have benefited greatly in public health by increased trade, improved technology, and respected human rights. Some of the negative aspects of globalization had serious impact to public health. In other words, the more interconnection make the more sufferers. In Derek Yach’s article, professor and head of division of global health, “The Globalization of Public Health, I: Threats and Opportunities” he stated that ”The domain of globalization includes many interconnected phenomena and risk that affect the sustainability of health systems and the well-being of the populations of both developing and industrialized countries”(1998, p2). For example, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a viral respiratory illness. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that “SARS was first reported in Asia in February 2003. Over the next few months, the illness spread to more than two dozen countries in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia before the SARS global outbreak of 2003 was contained” (Basic Information About SARS, 2005, para. 1). As this result, the World Health Organization (WHO) should promote the public health policies of international to prevent the fatal contagious diseases.
A third claim is that notwithstanding developing countries trying doing their best to keep up the nation-states traditions and cultures, globalization wiping off intensely. In fact, it is obvious how bad of globalization will impact on tradition or culture. Because foreign influences still destroy the good of ways of life violently. According to Mohammed Moussalli (2003) in his article “impact of globalization” claimed that ”Cultural invasion of globalization will lead to the disintegration of identity and the spirit of culture.(para.5) For example, there have lots of the fast food restaurants and foreign restaurants in Taiwan, such as McDonald, KFC, japans’ food, and Korean food. They led the many Taiwanese to changed diet behavior and culture. Besides, young people pent lot of money and time to follow the fashion of foreign countries, and discarded old beliefs. Thus many Taiwanese worry about the Americanization of their country, seeing the use the U.S. style. Thus, every country should pay attention to this problem and prevent to lose good tradition and culture.
The fourth argument at government issue is that globalization endangers developing countries’ sovereignty. The poor countries were unable to resist the canvasses and persuades from greedy businessmen of advanced countries who buy large amounts of that debt and to do a lot of portfolio investment and even create factories. Some countries and companies want to interfere or demand in the internal affairs of other countries in order to earn maximum Profit. In fact, these actions were interpreted as a threat to national sovereignty. Besides, an interesting side-effect of globalization on weaker nation-states is that governments sacrifice the power, resource and right of human in order to compete with others countries to attract industry and investment. Stuart Smith (1998) also claimed that “the real power of nation-states has been greatly diminished …They need to please investors, whose supply of loyalty is pretty close to zero.” (p.2). As a result, no any supranational government organizations could match up the power of supranational firms. Indeed, the powerful films or countries seized the chance of disparity to persecute externalities of developing countries. Every country should have the right to self-government in order to ensure national peace, equality and freedom. Hence, government of developing countries should careful about this issue and resist the invasion of greedy merchants.
In conclusion, globalization is double faced, one promising and the other threatening. Based on the argument of above-mentioned, the poisons of globalization seem to outweigh the delicacies of globalization. Up to the present globalization was still threatening the entire world, particularly on the environmental problem, public healthful topic, cultural invasion, and governmental right of the developing countries. Therefore, developing countries should pick out the danger of globalization. The poison of globalization can be removed in a number of ways. First, we should establish a supranational government organization to contend with this enigma. Second, we should create a communication platform to know where poison is and where delicacy is. Finally, individual could curtail supranational firms’ powers by antitrust. Thus market and externalities will approach to win- win situation.
Reference:
Basic information about SARS. (2005, May 3). Retrieved September 28, 2006, from http://www.cdc.gov/NCIDOD/SARS/factsheet.htm
Figueres, J. M. (2003, October 01). Making Globalization Work. Global Envision. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from http://www. globalenvision.org/library/3/536/
Manzella, J. (2002, September 1). Globalization's Effects. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.aworldconnected.org/article.php /231.html
Moussalli, M. (2003, August 25). Impact of Globalization. Global Policy Forum. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.globalpolicy.org/ golbaliz/cultural/2003/0828islam.html
Report says globalization may work in favor of environment. (2000, March 27). Environmental News Network. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from EBSCO.
Smith, S. (1998). The impact of globalization on sovereignty and the environment. United States Law Journal, 42, 263-271.
Globalization (n.d.). Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Globalization
Yach, D. (1998, May). The globalization of public health, I: Threats and opportunities. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 5,735-738.
Figueres, J. M. (2003, October 01). Making Globalization Work. Global Envision. Retrieved September 26, 2006, from http://www. globalenvision.org/library/3/536/
Manzella, J. (2002, September 1). Globalization's Effects. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.aworldconnected.org/article.php /231.html
Moussalli, M. (2003, August 25). Impact of Globalization. Global Policy Forum. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.globalpolicy.org/ golbaliz/cultural/2003/0828islam.html
Report says globalization may work in favor of environment. (2000, March 27). Environmental News Network. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from EBSCO.
Smith, S. (1998). The impact of globalization on sovereignty and the environment. United States Law Journal, 42, 263-271.
Globalization (n.d.). Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved September 28, 2006 from http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Globalization
Yach, D. (1998, May). The globalization of public health, I: Threats and opportunities. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 5,735-738.
No comments:
Post a Comment