Justifiable Risk or headless Fear? The Difference between experienced and factual Disadvantages of a Process called Globalisation: Difference between revisions

From VCSEwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 18: Line 18:


"One of the most spread concerns at this is the fear of losing the own job. The globalisation of human capital leads to heated discussions and negative associations with the whole process of globalisation, especially in the Western civilisation, since the production in Asia and Latin America is in almost all cases cheaper, occasionally better and more and more often better and cheaper. Often the fear of losing the job to a competitor from abroad superposes all other effects, notwithstanding whether they are reckoned to be positive or negative. In this case, the boundaries between negative consequences and personal dismay become blurred. To actualise the discussion of the globalisation of human capital several aspects need additionally to be considered. First of all, we need to evaluate who is affected by this change on the employment market in fact. In relation to the Stolper-Samualson-Theorem one awareness can be concluded - the globalisation of human capital only refers to the low educated level, while executives and tasks with a high educated basis of knowledge are almost unaffected. Hence, this system for chances of success which basis lies in the education of people, not in their origin or place of birth might even be a fairer system than the one we are living in right now.  
"One of the most spread concerns at this is the fear of losing the own job. The globalisation of human capital leads to heated discussions and negative associations with the whole process of globalisation, especially in the Western civilisation, since the production in Asia and Latin America is in almost all cases cheaper, occasionally better and more and more often better and cheaper. Often the fear of losing the job to a competitor from abroad superposes all other effects, notwithstanding whether they are reckoned to be positive or negative. In this case, the boundaries between negative consequences and personal dismay become blurred. To actualise the discussion of the globalisation of human capital several aspects need additionally to be considered. First of all, we need to evaluate who is affected by this change on the employment market in fact. In relation to the Stolper-Samualson-Theorem one awareness can be concluded - the globalisation of human capital only refers to the low educated level, while executives and tasks with a high educated basis of knowledge are almost unaffected. Hence, this system for chances of success which basis lies in the education of people, not in their origin or place of birth might even be a fairer system than the one we are living in right now.  
This idea leads to a second global concern. When discussing about globalisation often the word fairness appears, especially in relation to the 3rd world or more precisely to the least developed countries (LDC, for more information and criteria see [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries]]). The general opinion claims that the so-called “losers“ of the globalisation would suffer from this process. There is a huge concern existing in prospects of the development of these countries. However, in this case causes and effects are mixed, since the process of globalisation did not impoverish the once successfully acting country. Hence, the question comes whether the political, economical and/or social situation of countries like Burkina Faso, Cambodia or Sierra Leone really did change to the worse since the globalisation process started to accelerate. Those countries never took the step towards the development to an industrial country. Therefore the globalisation process did not narrow any of the countries‘ chances to improve their situation. Not clear, though, is the question whether globalisation will do this. One argument for that is the frequently cited increasing gap between the rich and the poor (cf. Kiely, R.: 1988, Transnational corporations, global capital and the Third World, in R. Kiely and P. Marfleet (eds.), Globalization and the Third World, Routledge, London, pp. 45–66). Albeit this argument surely describes a serious phenomenon of the contemporary era, there are more aspects which need to be considered. To start with, it is of the utmost importance to stress the influence of education in order to improve a countries‘ welfare. As above already pointed out, the chances of improving the individuals‘ situation and consecutively the countries‘ welfare by education increase. Additionally another consequence of globalisation has a positive impact: by emphasising not only local but global problems financial means from foreign countries help improving the educational system in case the LDC country itself does, for whatever reason, or can not afford investing.  
This idea leads to a second global concern. When discussing about globalisation often the word fairness appears, especially in relation to the 3rd world or more precisely to the least developed countries (LDC, for more information and criteria see [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries]]). The general opinion claims that the so-called “losers“ of the globalisation would suffer from this process. There is a huge concern existing in prospects of the development of these countries. However, in this case causes and effects are mixed, since the process of globalisation did not impoverish the once successfully acting country. Hence, the question comes whether the political, economical and/or social situation of countries like Burkina Faso, Cambodia or Sierra Leone really did change to the worse since the globalisation process started to accelerate. Those countries never took the step towards the development to an industrial country. Therefore the globalisation process did not narrow any of the countries‘ chances to improve their situation. Not clear, though, is the question whether globalisation will do this. One argument for that is the frequently cited increasing gap between the rich and the poor (cf. Kiely, R.: 1988, Transnational corporations, global capital and the Third World, in R. Kiely and P. Marfleet (eds.), Globalization and the Third World, Routledge, London, pp. 45–66). Albeit this argument surely describes a serious phenomenon of the contemporary era, there are more aspects which need to be considered. To start with, it is of the utmost importance to stress the influence of education in order to improve a countries‘ welfare. As above already pointed out, the chances of improving the individuals‘ situation and consecutively the countries‘ welfare by education increase. Additionally another consequence of globalisation has a positive impact: by emphasising not only local but global problems financial means from foreign countries help improving the educational system in case the LDC country itself does, for whatever reason, or can not afford investing.  
   
   

Revision as of 15:15, 21 November 2009

Introduction: Definitions and Terms

Globalisation is a concept nowadays every single one of us has heard of. However, not many people deal with the subject of globalisation. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for instance refers to this easily mistakable term as “a process of closer economic integration of global markets“ ([1]) and although quite simple, this definition can be regarded as a reasoned definition for an organisation, which primarily deals with economical issues. Nevertheless, this definition is too limited in order to stress the complexity and duality of the process of globalisation. The German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology adds, that “this development is being driven forward by world-wide information networks and communication technologies“ ([2]), while the U.S. Department of Commerce focusses on the “potential to affect each other more quickly and to a higher degree than ever before“ (Globalization and Minority-owned Businesses in the United States: Assessment and Prospects (2003), p. 4).

Hence, misunderstandings and information of dubious origin lead to hasty conclusions. Therefore it seems to be of the utmost importance to clear the meaning and definition of certain terms before starting to analyse the content matters. First of all, a clear determination is necessary between chances and risks and hopes and concerns in regards to the issues of globalisation. The Oxford Dictionary claims quite plainly that concern is “a feeling of worry, especially one that is shared by many people“ (Oxford Advanced Learner‘s Dictionary, 2000, p. 253), while hope is “a belief that something you want will happen“ (ibid, 2000, p. 627). Chance on the other hand is defined as “a possibility of something happening“ (ibid, p. 193), while risk means “the possibility of something bad happening at sometime in the future“ or “a situation that could be bad or have a dangerous result“ (ibid, 2000, p. 1105). As a result of the definitions the difference between potential and realistic prognoses, especially in regards to the globalisation process, becomes evident. In addition, another important difference between the terms hopes and concerns and accordingly chances and risks is, that the latter is rather characterised by the opportunity of active shaping, while hope and concern are if anything rather passive attributes. When mentioning the term globalisation, this article refers to the definition of the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology ([3]).

There are two more aspect in regards to the discussion of globalisation which often tend to be forgotten. First of all, people often seem to search for a reset-button to stop this so anonymous appearing and therefore frightening process. However, this process which we experience and its consequences we feel right now, is dialectic but not in the least reversible. One reason for this irreversibility is the necessary awareness, that globalisation is not a phenomenon of this new century but of a long history. While some literature refers to globalisation as “a fundamental change of human institutions in the contemporary era“ (Does Globalization affect Human Well-Being?, 2006, p. 104), we actually have to define the start of this process with the very beginning of human civilisation and trade ([4], last visit: 8th November, 2009). Naturally, our today‘s world implicates increasing complexity, there are analogies existing, though.

In the following, this article will deal with these terms as to the development of globalisation and as to the societies it is affecting.


Body: Arguments and Analysis

"Globalization in its current speed overwhelms the adaptability of many people" (Fabian Siggemann, [[5]]) and therefore fans fear and concerns. In order to examine the research question which of the major concerns are synonymous to the actual risks during the process of globalisation and which result from individual environment or lack of information and accordingly the disregard of important aspects, several facets and aspects need to be pointed out related to the different sections of concern.

"One of the most spread concerns at this is the fear of losing the own job. The globalisation of human capital leads to heated discussions and negative associations with the whole process of globalisation, especially in the Western civilisation, since the production in Asia and Latin America is in almost all cases cheaper, occasionally better and more and more often better and cheaper. Often the fear of losing the job to a competitor from abroad superposes all other effects, notwithstanding whether they are reckoned to be positive or negative. In this case, the boundaries between negative consequences and personal dismay become blurred. To actualise the discussion of the globalisation of human capital several aspects need additionally to be considered. First of all, we need to evaluate who is affected by this change on the employment market in fact. In relation to the Stolper-Samualson-Theorem one awareness can be concluded - the globalisation of human capital only refers to the low educated level, while executives and tasks with a high educated basis of knowledge are almost unaffected. Hence, this system for chances of success which basis lies in the education of people, not in their origin or place of birth might even be a fairer system than the one we are living in right now.

This idea leads to a second global concern. When discussing about globalisation often the word fairness appears, especially in relation to the 3rd world or more precisely to the least developed countries (LDC, for more information and criteria see [[6]]). The general opinion claims that the so-called “losers“ of the globalisation would suffer from this process. There is a huge concern existing in prospects of the development of these countries. However, in this case causes and effects are mixed, since the process of globalisation did not impoverish the once successfully acting country. Hence, the question comes whether the political, economical and/or social situation of countries like Burkina Faso, Cambodia or Sierra Leone really did change to the worse since the globalisation process started to accelerate. Those countries never took the step towards the development to an industrial country. Therefore the globalisation process did not narrow any of the countries‘ chances to improve their situation. Not clear, though, is the question whether globalisation will do this. One argument for that is the frequently cited increasing gap between the rich and the poor (cf. Kiely, R.: 1988, Transnational corporations, global capital and the Third World, in R. Kiely and P. Marfleet (eds.), Globalization and the Third World, Routledge, London, pp. 45–66). Albeit this argument surely describes a serious phenomenon of the contemporary era, there are more aspects which need to be considered. To start with, it is of the utmost importance to stress the influence of education in order to improve a countries‘ welfare. As above already pointed out, the chances of improving the individuals‘ situation and consecutively the countries‘ welfare by education increase. Additionally another consequence of globalisation has a positive impact: by emphasising not only local but global problems financial means from foreign countries help improving the educational system in case the LDC country itself does, for whatever reason, or can not afford investing.


Environment

Politics

Religion and Culture

Information and Knowledge

Economics

Conclusion: Review and Prospects

edit


Reference List

  • Hornby, A. S. (ed.), Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary (2000), London
  • Owens, J., Globalization and Minority-owned Businesses in the United States: Assessment and Prospects (2003), Washington
  • Tsai, M.-C., Does Globalization affect Human Well-Being? (2006), Durban




See also:

Retrieved from "https://vcsewiki.czp.cuni.cz/w/index.php?title=Justifiable_Risk_or_headless_Fear%3F_The_Difference_between_experienced_and_factual_Disadvantages_of_a_Process_called_Globalisation&oldid=603"