Globalization And Sub-Saharan Africa

On the contrary, taking a more critical view on the effects of globalisation, the findings seem to differ. The fact is that globalisation is pretty much centralised on only a few countries run by a handful of governments. China and India, For example, have been the only two countries to realise any advancements in terms of development and poverty eradication through globalisation, whilst trade openness has led to a rise in income inequalities and generally very uneven gains in the South American regions. And one entire continent, Africa, has actually become more marginalised (Tsikata, 2001, p. 12). The governmental and economic institutions of the developing countries, especially the latter, put them at a disadvantage where weak political, economic and legal structures led to wide spread corruption, conflict and insecurity. Whereas, developed countries already had good infrastructures coupled with high levels of skilled labour, managerial competence and advanced technology making it almost impossible for developing countries to compete. For example, the Japanese government vs. Indonesian government car industry case at the WTO (Kompas, 19 July 1999 ed.).

Globalization and the society we know today were created by the technological improvement we have seen since the beginning of the 18th century. Globalization and the new technology is a very relevant topic to discuss, because it is important to see the positive and negative aspects of it. We are today closer than ever before you can chat or talk with a person from a different continent, which makes closer. Technology is unfortunately too easy to abuse a concrete example of that is World War 2. Would we have had a better world without it, and was it the technology that killed the Afro-American people or was it the people who killed people. The essay “Time and Distance Overcome” was written by Eula Biss and published

In her piece, “Why Global Inequality Matters,” Nancy Birdsall argues that global inequality is an issue because it can negatively affect the social life, the political process and the economy of countries (especially developing ones). She looks at “how global integration affects poor versus rich countries (and people within countries), and on the resulting limits to poor countries’ (and poor people’s) ability to capture the potential benefits of globalization.” In order to argue her point further, she expounds on why global inequality matters and explores the possible role that globalization may have in perpetuating global inequality. Inequality matters, especially in developing countries with already weak institutions, because it may runs “the risk

The second topic in the inequality debate is about inequality between nations. This argument discusses whether globalization is responsible for widening the average income gap between rich and poor nations. When inspecting the average incomes of rich and poor nations, the widening income gap does not occur everywhere. Overall, the debate of inequality between nations results show that developing nations working towards globalization and can possibly grow faster than developed nations. Nations that fail to make their way into the global market may become worse off.

Economic inequality among countries has been declining due to the increased inequality within countries. This has been mainly caused by the introduction of globalization, resulting in the decline of production in the developed countries. For instance, in my global issues class, we had to discuss globalization and whether it was a good or bad thing. Whereas, some of us said it was a good thing, few of my classmates stated that globalization is known for making the rich even richer, and increasing uneven economy within

That this was also the decade in which globalization came into full swing is more than a minor inconvenience for its advocates” (Rodrick). If globalization is supposed to present an advantage to developing countries, why have there been so many setbacks? Indeed, both sides will have its winners and losers regardless of which side of the development coin they live on, but for the most part globalization has lifted millions out of poverty, improved the standard of living, and increased life expectancy rates all while keeping developed nations relatively competitive to their developing counterparts. Globalization’s value is that it seeks to create an economic equilibrium in the world, where parties are free from barriers and can benefit from one another through a more efficient allocation of resources. This allows all participating nations to contribute to an integrated economy and where all nations willing to embrace globalization have the potential to benefit. Regardless, the path to successful integration to the global economy has not always been easy. There is contention towards globalization as some argue that it is detrimental to developed nations, while many developing countries that were forced to hastily open up their markets and integrate failed. However, if implemented properly, globalization has proven that it can benefit all parties involved and that the potential gains outweigh the losses.

Wade (2004) applies a more empirical analysis to determine if globalization reduces global poverty and income inequality. Analysis of global poverty and income inequality data provides evidence that poverty has decreased, but some evidence shows income inequality within and between states has increased. Absolute income gaps are shown to be widening. Wade concludes

The rise of globalization following WWII generated three important factors that define today’s world. McNeill and McNeill agree with Pollard, Rosenberg, and Tignor that multiple economic changes, such as the creation of financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) contributed to the globalization of the world economy. Carter and Warren further this argument by claiming that globalization has caused shifts in the modern economy, namely the rise of Asian economic powers. However, all three historians agree that the rise of globalization goes hand in hand with the rise of inequality in today’s world. Gaps in power, wealth, and access to information have only widened due to the trend of globalization. The final key factor defining our world today are the ongoing processes affecting development countries. McNeill and McNeill argue similarly to Carter and Warren that the end of imperialism generated new nations who quickly realized the free market was a pathway to stability. However, Pollard et al. and McNeill and McNeill place importance on financial institutions like the IMF forcing developing nations to reform their economies to be subservient to the world’s economy. Together, these historians argue that the trend of globalization following WWII caused factors like the modern global economy, the rise in inequality, and the development of new, decolonized nations to be key determiners in the world today.

According to Michael Todaro(2014), globalization refers to the increased openness of countries to international trade, financial flows, and foreign direct investment(FDI). Globalization is a concept that affects and would continue to affect all aspects of the world economy both domestically and internationally. According to Robert Hiplin, growth of international trade, massie financial flows, and the activities of multinational corporations (MNC’s) are tying national economies more tightly to one another, thus making globalization feature of the world economy. But is globalization a ‘PANACEA’ or a ‘PERFIDY’ to the economic development of the global south?. Brittan(1998) for instance define globalization as “a whirlwind of relentless and disruptive change which leaves governments helpless and leaves a trail of economic, social, cultural and environmental problems

5. Is the ‘criminalisation’ of the State a useful and accurate analysis of the consequences of globalisation for Sub-Saharan Africa? Exemplify your answer.

It is fair to say that the ones who benefit the most in economic globalization are developed countries whose social productive forces are highly developed ((El-Ojeili, C. & Hayden, P., 2006.). However, it is difficult for developing countries that are relatively

In all these developments, there is the underlying assumption that globalization is good for all and that its benefits are shared out (even if not equally) all over the world. The more developed countries benefit while the least developed countries tend to remain impoverished and do not share in the benefits.

Many different contexts group together to make up the term “globalization” such as: technology, trade, offshoring, outsourcing integration, migration, transportation, and environmental pollution. In plain terms, globalization can be described as a process that embraces economic and cultural transmissions between countries. This process is intended to improve the function of economic activities worldwide. The movement also supports the idea of internationalism. Influencing a nation to adopt new political views and educational values can be a potentially positive way to help a struggling nation develop. However, economic improvement in this situation is not always the case. Research provides an irregular pattern concerning economic development. Focusing in on the impact of globalization in South Africa, both positives and negatives have played a part in this country’s struggle to compete with the rest of the world.

Lauder Institute of Management and International Studies (2013) explain that the impact of globalization on poverty reduction has been uneven and even marginal in some regions. A question often raised is whether the actual distribution of gains from globalization is fair and in particular whether the poor benefit less from it. Researchers have argued that inequality in the aspect of gender inequality has led to a reduction in poverty and inequality. For example, globalization in some parts of the world has led to improvements in women’s education, health, legal rights, equality of roles and socioeconomic status. However, progress in the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa continues to be rather

Globalization is the proximate and multidimensional set of political, economic, social, and technological integration around the globe. The increasing interconnectedness among countries can be seen through the prism of globalization. Essentially, the lives of people living in distant cities like Bangalore and Silicon Valley are brought closer as a result of this phenomenon. Drivers of this adjacent include; the expansion of trade, technological exchange, labor movement and investments (Stearns 2017). The discourse of globalization encompasses several multidisciplinary themes. The paper, however, concentrates on the economic factors, “which, entails the closer economic integration of countries of the world through increased flow of goods, services, capital and even labor.” (Stiglitz 2007: 4). The paper focuses on economic globalization and elucidates whether the globalization has reduced poverty and inequality or had reproduced the reversed implications. Meanwhile, the paper reveals if the developing world has benefited from the set. This seems to be the central question that policymakers, development economists, and politicians have been grappling with for years. The paper is presented in three parts. Part one reflects on the historical context of the problem statement. The second part compiles literature and juxtaposes with cases to corroborate the globalization-poverty-inequality triangle. Finally, the conclusion represents the author’s viewpoint on the