Globalization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

It may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. Tagged since September 2011. It is written like a personal reflection or essay rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject. Tagged
since September 2011.

Its neutrality is disputed. Tagged since September 2011.

Globalization refers to the increasing unification of the world's economic order through reduction of such barriers to international trade as tariffs, export fees, and import quotas. The goal is to increase material wealth, goods, and services through an international division of labor by efficiencies catalyzed by international relations, specialization and competition. It describes the process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through communication, transportation, and trade. The term is most closely associated with the term economic globalization: the integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, the spread of technology, and military presence.[1] However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors.[2] The term can also refer to the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, or popular culture through acculturation. An aspect of the world which has gone through the process can be said to be globalized.

Against this view, an alternative approach stresses how globalization has actually decreased inter-cultural contacts while increasing the possibility of international and intranational conflict.[3]
Contents
[hide]

1 Definitions 2 History 3 Measurement 4 Effects o 4.1 Industrial o 4.2 Financial o 4.3 Economic o 4.4 Political o 4.5 Informational o 4.6 Language o 4.7 Ecological o 4.8 Cultural o 4.9 Technical o 4.10 Religious o 4.11 Cultural effects o 4.12 Democratizing effect of communications 5 Economic liberalization o 5.1 Jobs 5.1.1 Income inequality 5.1.2 Brain drains 5.1.3 Sweatshops o 5.2 Business process outsourcing o 5.3 Natural resources 5.3.1 Air 5.3.2 Forests

5.3.3 Minerals 5.3.4 Effects of population growth on food supplies o 5.4 Health o 5.5 Global market 5.5.1 Expansion 5.5.2 Financial interdependency 5.5.3 Drug and illicit goods trade 6 Debate o 6.1 Politicization in the United States o 6.2 Other industrialized countries o 6.3 Developing world 7 Alternative interpretations o 7.1 Advocates o 7.2 Practical approach o 7.3 Critics o 7.4 Common ground 8 Anti-globalization movement 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links o 12.1 Multimedia

Definitions
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "globalization" was first employed in a publication entitled Towards New Education in 1930, to denote a holistic view of human experience in education.[4] An early description of globalization was penned by the founder of the Bible Student movement Charles Taze Russell who coined the term 'corporate giants' in 1897,[5] although it was not until the 1960s that the term began to be widely used by economists and

other social scientists. The term has since then achieved widespread use in the mainstream press by the later half of the 1980s. Since its inception, the concept of globalization has inspired numerous competing definitions and interpretations, with antecedents dating back to the great movements of trade and empire across Asia and the Indian Ocean from the 15th century onwards.[6] The United Nations ESCWA says globalization "is a widelyused term that can be defined in a number of different ways. When used in an economic context, it refers to the reduction and removal of barriers between national borders in order to facilitate the flow of goods, capital, services and labour... although considerable barriers remain to the flow of labor... Globalization is not a new phenomenon. It began towards the end of the nineteenth century, but it slowed down during the period from the start of the First World War until the third quarter of the twentieth century. This slowdown can be attributed to the inward-looking policies pursued by a number of countries in order to protect their respective industries... however, the pace of globalization picked up rapidly during the fourth quarter of the twentieth century..."[7]

HSBC, one of the world's largest banks, operates across the globe.[8][9] Shown here is the HSBC Global Technology Centre inPune, India which develops software for the entire HSBC group.[10]

Tom G. Palmer of the Cato Institute defines globalization as "the diminution or elimination of state-enforced restrictions on exchanges across borders and the increasingly integrated and complex global system of production and exchange that has emerged as a result."[11] Thomas L. Friedman has examined the impact of the "flattening" of the world, and argues that globalized trade, outsourcing, supply-chaining, and political forces have changed the world permanently, for both better and worse. He also argues that the pace of globalization is quickening and will continue to have a growing impact on business organization and practice.[12] Finally, Takis Fotopoulos argues that globalization is the result of systemic trends manifesting the market economy's grow-or-die dynamic, following the rapid expansion of transnational corporations. Because these trends have not been offset effectively by counter-tendencies that could have emanated from trade-union action and other forms of political activity, the outcome has been globalization. This is a multifaceted and irreversible phenomenon within the system of the market economy and it is expressed as: economic globalization, namely, the opening and deregulation of commodity, capital and labour markets which led to the present form of neoliberal globalization; political globalization, i.e., the emergence of a transnational elite and the phasing out of the all-powerful nation-state of the statist period; cultural globalization, i.e., the worldwide homogenization of culture; ideological globalization; technological globalization; social globalization.[13]

History
Main article: History of globalization

Extent of the Silk Road and Spice traderoutes blocked by the Ottoman Empire in 1453 spurring exploration

The historical origins of globalization are the subject of ongoing debate. Though several scholars situate the origins of globalization in the modern era, others regard it as a phenomenon with a long history.[14] Perhaps the most extreme proponent of a deep historical origin for globalization was Andre Gunder Frank, an economist associated with dependency theory. Frank argued that a form of globalization has been in existence since the rise of trade links between Sumer and the Indus Valley Civilization in the third millennium B.C.[15] Critics of this idea contend that it rests upon an over-broad definition of globalization. An early form of globalized economics and culture, known as archaic globalization, existed during the Hellenistic Age, when commercialized urban centers were focused around the axis of Greek culture over a wide range that stretched from India to Spain, with such cities as Alexandria, Athens, and Antioch at its center. Others have perceived an early form of globalization in the trade links between the Roman Empire, the Parthian Empire, and the Han Dynasty. The increasing articulation of commercial links between these powers inspired the development of the Silk Road, which started in western China, reached the boundaries of the Parthian

empire, and continued onwards towards Rome.[16] With 300 Greek ships a year sailing between the Greco-Roman world and India, the annual trade may have reached 300,000 tons.[17] The Islamic Golden Age was also an important early stage of globalization, when Jewish and Muslim traders and explorers established a sustained economy across theOld World resulting in a globalization of crops, trade, knowledge and technology. Globally significant crops such as sugar and cotton became widely cultivated across the Muslim world in this period, while the necessity of learning Arabic and completing the Hajj created a cosmopolitan culture.[18]

Portuguese carrack in Nagasaki, 17th century Japanese Nanban art

Native New World crops exchanged globally: Maize, Tomato, Potato, Vanilla,Rubber, Cacao, Tobacco

The advent of the Mongol Empire, though destabilizing to the commercial centers of the Middle East and China, greatly

facilitated travel along the Silk Road. The Pax Mongolica of the thirteenth century had several other notable globalizing effects. It witnessed the creation of the first international postal service, as well as the rapid transmission of epidemic diseases such as bubonic plague across the newly unified regions of Central Asia.[19] These pre-modern phases of global or hemispheric exchange are sometimes known as archaic globalization. Up to the sixteenth century, however, even the largest systems of international exchange were limited to the Old World. The next phase, known as proto-globalization, was characterized by the rise of maritime European empires, in the 16th and 17th centuries, first the Portuguese andSpanish Empires, and later the Dutch and British Empires. In the 17th century, globalization became also a private business phenomenon when chartered companies likeBritish East India Company (founded in 1600), often described as the first multinational corporation, as well as the Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602) were established. The Age of Discovery brought a broad change in globalization, being the first period in which Eurasia and Africa engaged in substantial cultural, material and biologic exchange with the New World.[20] It began in the late 15th century, when the two Kingdoms of the Iberian Peninsula Portugal and Castile sent the first exploratory voyages[21] around the Horn of Africa and to the Americas, "discovered" in 1492 by Christopher Columbus. Global integration continued with the European colonization of the Americas initiating the Columbian Exchange,[22] the enormous widespread exchange of plants, animals, foods, human populations (including slaves), communicable diseases, and culture between the Eastern and Western hemispheres. New

crops that had come from the Americas via the European seafarers in the 16th century significantly contributed to the world's population growth.[23]

Animated map showing Colonial empiresevolution from 1492 to present

19th century Great Britain become the first global economic superpower, because of superior manufacturing technology and improved global communications such assteamships and railroads.

The 19th century witnessed the advent of globalization approaching its modern form. Industrialization allowed cheap production of household items using economies of scale,[citation needed] while rapid population growth created sustained demand for commodities. Globalization in this period was decisively shaped by nineteenth-century imperialism. After the First and Second Opium Wars and the completion of British conquest of India, vast populations of these regions became ready consumers of European exports. It was in this period that areas of sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific islands were incorporated into the world system. Meanwhile, the conquest of new parts of the globe, notably sub-Saharan Africa, by Europeans yielded valuable natural resources such

as rubber, diamonds and coal and helped fuel trade and investment between the European imperial powers, their colonies, and the United States.[24] The first phase of "modern globalization" began to break down at the beginning of the 20th century, with World War I, but resurfaced after World War II. This resurgence was partly the result of planning by politicians to break down borders hampering trade. Their work led to the Bretton Woods conference, an agreement by the world's leading politicians to lay down the framework for international commerce and finance, and the founding of several international institutions intended to oversee the processes of globalization. Globalization was also driven by the global expansion of multinational corporations based in the United States and Europe, and worldwide exchange of new developments in science, technology and products, with most significant inventions of this time having their origins in the Western world according toEncyclopedia Britannica.[25] Worldwide export of western culture went through the new mass media: film, radio and television and recorded music. Development and growth of international transport and telecommunication played a decisive role in modern globalization. These institutions include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank), and the International Monetary Fund. Globalization has been facilitated by advances in technology which have reduced the costs of trade, and trade negotiation rounds, originally under the auspices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which led to a series of agreements to remove restrictions on free trade. Since World War II, barriers to international trade have been considerably lowered through

international agreements GATT and its successor, the World Trade Organization (WTO). World exports rose from 8.5% in 1970, to 16.2% of total gross world product in 2001.[26] In the 1990s, the growth of low cost communication networks allowed work done using a computer to be moved to low wage locations for many job types. This included accounting, software development, and engineering design. In late 2000s, much of the industrialized world entered into a deep recession.[27] Some analysts say the world is going through a period of deglobalization after years of increasing economic integration.[28][29] China has recently[when?] become the world's largest exporter surpassing Germany.[30]

Measurement
Economic globalization can be measured in different ways. These center around the four main economic flows that characterize globalization: Goods and services, e.g., exports plus imports as a proportion of national income or per capita of population Labor/people, e.g., net migration rates; inward or outward migration flows, weighted by population Capital, e.g., inward or outward direct investment as a proportion of national income or per head of population Technology, e.g., international research & development flows; proportion of populations (and rates of change thereof) using particular inventions (especially 'factorneutral' technological advances such as the telephone, motorcar, broadband) As globalization is not only an economic phenomenon, a multivariate approach to measuring globalization is the

recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. The index measures the three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political. In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, an overall index of globalization and sub-indices referring to actual economic flows, economic restrictions, data on personal contact, data on information flows, and data on cultural proximity is calculated. Data is available on a yearly basis for 122 countries, as detailed in Dreher, Gaston and Martens (2008).[31] According to the index, the world's most globalized country is Belgium, followed by Austria, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Haiti, Myanmar, the Central African Republic and Burundi.[32] A.T. Kearney and Foreign Policy Magazine jointly publish another Globalization Index. According to the 2006 index, Singapore, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Denmark are the most globalized, while Indonesia, India and Iran are the least globalized among countries listed.

Effects
Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways

Industrial
Emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies, particularly movement of material and goods between and within national boundaries.International trade in manufactured goods has increased more than 100 times

(from $95 billion to $12 trillion) since 1955.[33] China's trade with Africa rose sevenfold during 200007 alone.[34][35]

Financial
Emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for borrowers. By the early part of the 21st century more than $1.5 trillion in national currencies were traded daily to support the expanded levels of trade and investment.[36]

As of 20052007, the Port of Shanghaiholds the title as the World's busiest port.[37][38][39]

Economic
Realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of goods and capital.[40]

Almost all notable worldwide ITcompanies have a presence in India. Four Indians were among the world's top 10 richest in 2008, worth a

combined $160 billion.[41] In 2007, China had 415,000 millionaires and India 123,000.[42]

Further, in the job market, employees compete indirectly in a global job market. In the past, the economic fate of workers was tied to the fate of national economies. With the advent of the information age and improvements in communication, this is no longer the case. Because workers compete in a global market, wages are less dependent on the success or failure of individual economies. This has had a major effect on wages and income distribution.[43] Survival in the new global business market calls for improved productivity and increased competition. Due to the market becoming worldwide, companies in various industries have to upgrade their products and use technology skilfully in order to face increased competition.[44]

Political
The development of globalisation has wide-ranging impacts on political developments, which particularly go along with the decrease of the importance of the state. Through the creation of sub-state and supra-state institutions such as the EU, the WTO, the G8 or the International Criminal Court, the state loses power of policy making and thus sovereignty.[45] However, many see the relative decline in US power as being based in globalisation, particularly due to its high trade imbalance. The consequence of this is a global power shift towards Asian states, particularly China, that has seem tremendous growth rates. In fact, current estimates claim that China's economy will overtake that of the United States by 2025.[46]

Informational

Increase in information flows between geographically remote locations. Arguably this is a technological change with the advent of fibre optic communications, satellites, and increased availability of telephone and Internet.

Language
The most spoken first language is Mandarin (845 million speakers) followed by Spanish (329 million speakers) and English (328 million speakers).[47] However the most popular second language is undoubtedly English, the "lingua franca" of globalization:

About 35% of the world's mail, telexes, and cables are in English. Approximately 40% of the world's radio programs are in English. English is the dominant language on the Internet.[48]

Ecological
The advent of global environmental challenges that might be solved with international cooperation, such as climate change, cross-boundary water and air pollution, over-fishing of the ocean, and the spread of invasive species. Since many factories are built in developing countries with less environmental regulation, globalism and free trade may increase pollution and impact on precious fresh water resources(Hoekstra and Chapagain 2008).[49] On the other hand, economic development historically required a "dirty" industrial stage, and it is argued that developing countries should not, via regulation, be prohibited from increasing their standard of living.

London is a city of considerable diversity. As of 2008, estimates were published that stated that approximately 30% of London's total population was from an ethnic minority group. The latest official figures show that in 2008, 590,000 people arrived to live in the UK whilst 427,000 left, meaning that net inward migration was 163,000.[50]

Cultural
Growth of cross-cultural contacts; advent of new categories of consciousness and identities which embodies cultural diffusion, the desire to increase one's standard of living and enjoy foreign products and ideas, adopt new technology and practices, and participate in a "world culture".[51] Some bemoan the resulting consumerism and loss of languages. Also see Transformation of culture. This might also affect the spreading of multiculturalism, and better individual access to cultural diversity (e.g. through the export of Hollywood)[52]. Some consider such "imported" culture a danger, since it may supplant the local culture, causing reduction in diversity or evenassimilation. Others consider multiculturalism to promote peace and understanding between people. A third position that gained popularity is the notion that multiculturalism to a new form of monoculture in which no distinctions exist and everyone shifts between various lifestyles in terms of music, cloth and other aspects once more firmly attached to a single

culture. Thus not mere cultural assimilation as mentioned above but the obliteration of culture as we know it today.[53][54] Greater international travel and tourism. WHO estimates that up to 500,000 people are on planes at any one time.[citation needed][55] In 2008, there were over 922 million international tourist arrivals, with a growth of 1.9% as compared to 2007.[56] Greater immigration,[57] including illegal immigration.[58] The IOM estimates there are more than 200 million migrants around the world today.[59] Newly available data show that remittance flows to developing countries reached $328 billion in 2008.[60] Spread of local consumer products (e.g., food) to other countries (often adapted to their culture). Worldwide fads and pop culture such as Pokmon, Sudoku, Numa Numa, Origami, Idol series, YouTube, Orkut, Facebook, and Myspace; accessible only to those who have Internet or Television, leaving out a substantial portion of the Earth's population.

The construction of continental hotels is a major consequence of globalization process in affiliation with tourism and travel industry,Dariush Grand Hotel, Kish, Iran

Worldwide sporting events such as FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games. Incorporation of multinational corporations into new media. As the sponsors of the All-

Blacksrugby team, Adidas had created a parallel website with a downloadable interactive rugby game for its fans to play and compete.[61]

Social development of the system of non-governmental organizations as main agents of global public policy, including humanitarian aid and developmental efforts.[62]

Technical
Central aspect of globalisation has been the development of a Global Information System, and greater transborder data flow, using such technologies as the Internet,communication satellites, submarine fiber optic cable, and wireless telephones, which increased the number of standards applied globally (e.g., copyright laws, patentsand world trade agreements) but also affects Legal/Ethical norms such as the creation of the international criminal court and international justice movements, crime importation and raising awareness of global crime-fighting efforts and cooperation, the emergence of Global administrative law.

Religious
The spread and increased interrelations of various religious groups, ideas, and practices and their ideas of the meanings and values of particular spaces.[63]

Cultural effects

Globalization has influenced the use of language across the world. This street in Hong Kong, a former British colony, shows various signs, a few of which incorporate both Chinese and British English.

Japanese McDonald's fast food as evidence of corporate globalization and the integration of the same into different cultures.

"Culture" is defined as patterns of human activity and the symbols that give these activities significance. According to prevailing notions, globalization has 'joined' different cultures and turned them into something different.[64] The dominant view stresses that globalization should be distinguished from Americanization. This approach has been used since the late 1980s to conceal the unidirectional, top-down character of US-led globalization as it was being relentlessly imposed on the rest of the world. Recently, this view has been challenged by highlighting globalization's irradiating pattern as largely derived from decisions originally taken in Washington, D.C., particularly in the economic and cultural fields.[65] Culinary culture has become extensively globalized. For example, Japanese noodles, Swedish meatballs, Indian curry and French cheese have become popular outside their countries of origin. Two American companies, McDonald's and Starbucks, are often cited as examples of globalization, with over 31,000 and 18,000 locations operating worldwide, respectively.

Another common practice brought about by globalization is the usage of Chinese characters in tattoos. These tattoos are popular with today's youth despite the lack of social acceptance of tattoos in China.[66] Also, there is a lack of comprehension in the meaning of Chinese characters that people get,[67] making this an example ofcultural appropriation. The internet breaks down cultural boundaries across the world by enabling easy, near-instantaneous communication between people anywhere in a variety of digital forms and media. The Internet is associated with the process of cultural globalization because it allows interaction and communication between people with very different lifestyles and from very different cultures. Photo sharing websites allow interaction even where language would otherwise be a barrier.

Democratizing effect of communications

Exchange of information via the internet is playing a major role in the democratization of many countries.[68] Virtualization of industries since the dawn of ecommerce has transferred the power to the buyer, and the same effect has transitioned into voting systems by the groupin effect of social media.

Economic liberalization
Further information: Neoliberalism According to Jagdish Bhagwati, a former adviser to the U.N. on globalization, although there are obvious problems with overly rapid development, globalization is a very positive force that lifts countries out of poverty. According to him, it causes a virtual economic cycle associated with faster economic growth.[69]

Workers in developing countries now have more occupational choices than ever before. Educated workers in developing countries are able to compete on the global job market for high paying jobs. Production workers in developing countries are not only able to compete, they have a strong advantage over their counterparts in the industrialized world.[70] This translates into increased opportunity. Workers have the choice of emigrating and taking jobs in industrial countries or staying at home to work in outsourced industries. In addition, the global economy provides a market for the products of cottage industry, providing more opportunities.[69] Globalization has generated significant international opposition over concerns that it has increased inequality and environmental degradation.[71] In the Midwestern United States, globalization has eaten away at itscompetitive edge in industry and agriculture, lowering the quality of life.[72] Some also view the effect of globalization on culture as a rising concern. Along with globalization of economies and trade, culture is being imported and exported as well. The concern is that the stronger, bigger countries such as the United States, may overrun the other, smaller countries' cultures, leading to those customs and values fading away. This process is also sometimes referred to as Americanization orMcDonaldization. [73]

Jobs
Income inequality
The globalization of the job market has had negative consequences in developed countries. Mind workers (engineers, attorneys, scientists, professors, executives, journalists, consultants) are able to compete successfully in the world market and command high wages. Conversely,

production workers and service workers in industrialized nations are unable to compete directly with workers in third world countries.[43]Workflow changes so that poor countries gain the low-value-added element of work formerly done in rich countries, while higher-value work is retained; for instance, the total number of people employed in manufacturing in the USA declined, but there were great increases in value added per worker.[74] This has resulted in a growing gap between the incomes of the rich and poor. This trend seems to be greater in the United States than other industrial countries. Income inequality in the United States started to rise in the late 1970s, however the rate of increase rose sharply in the 21st century; it has now reached a level comparable with that found in developing countries.[75] (Cf. The impact of the information age on the workforce)

Brain drains
Opportunities in rich countries drive talent away from poor countries, leading to brain drains. Brain drain has cost the African continent over $4.1 billion in the employment of 150,000 expatriate professionals annually.[76] The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Assocham) estimates that the brain drain of Indian students cost India $10 billion per year.[77]

A maquila in Mexico

Sweatshops
In many poorer nations, globalization is the result of foreign businesses utilizing workers in a country to take advantage of the lower wage rates. One example used by anti-globalization protestors is the use of sweatshops by manufacturers. According to Global Exchange these "Sweat Shops" are widely used by sports shoe manufacturers and mentions one company in particular Nike.[78] There are factories set up in the poor countries where employees agree to work for lower wages than would be required in richer countries. Several agencies have been set up worldwide specifically designed to focus on anti-sweatshop campaigns and education of such. In the USA, the National Labor Committee has proposed a number of bills as part of Decent Working Conditions and Fair Competition Act, which have thus far failed in Congress. The legislation would legally require companies to respect human and worker rights by prohibiting the import, sale, or export of sweatshop goods.[79] Specifically, these core standards include no child labor, no forced labor, freedom of association, right to organize and bargain collectively, as well as the right to decent working conditions.[80]

Business process outsourcing

Main article: Business process outsourcing In the rich world, business process outsourcing has, like most other arms of globalisation, been a double-edged sword; it enables cheaper services but displaces some service-sector jobs. However, in poorer countries to which service jobs are

outsourced, the benefits have been unambiguous; in India, the outsourcing industry is the "primary engine of the countrys development over the next few decades, contributing broadly to GDP growth, employment growth, and poverty alleviation".[81][82]

Natural resources
Air
In 2007, China surpassed the United States as the top emitter of CO2.[83] Only 1 percent of the countrys 560 million city inhabitants (2007) breathe air deemed safe by the European Union.

Burning forest in Brazil. The removal of forest to make way for cattle ranching was the leading cause of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon from the mid 1960s. Recently,[when?] soybeans have become one of the most important contributors to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon.[84]

Forests
A major source of deforestation is the logging industry, driven spectacularly by China and Japan.[85] China and India are quickly becoming large oil consumers.[86][87]China has seen oil consumption grow by 8% yearly since 2002, doubling from 19962006.[88] State of the World 2006 report said the two countries' high economic growthhid a reality of severe pollution. The report states:

The world's ecological capacity is simply insufficient to satisfy the ambitions of China, India, Japan, Europe and the United States as well as the aspirations of the rest of the world in a sustainable way[89] At present rates, tropical rainforests in Indonesia would be logged out in 10 years, Papua New Guinea in 13 to 16 years.[90]

Minerals
Without more recycling, zinc could be used up by 2037, both indium and hafnium could run out by 2017, and terbium could be gone before 2012.[91] In a 2006 news story,BBC reported, "...if China and India were to consume as much resources per capita as United States or Japan in 2030 together they would require a full planet Earth to meet their needs.[89] In the longterm these effects can lead to increased conflict over dwindling resources[92] and in the worst case a Malthusian catastrophe.

Effects of population growth on food supplies

The head of the International Food Policy Research Institute, stated in 2008 that the gradual change in diet among newly prosperous populations is the most important factor underpinning the rise in global food prices.[93] From 1950 to 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the world, grain production increased by over 250%.[94] The world population has grown by about 4 billion since the beginning of the Green Revolution and most believe that, without the Revolution, there would be greater famine and malnutrition than the UN presently documents (approximately 850 million people suffering from chronic malnutrition in 2005).[95][96]

It is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain food security in a world beset by a confluence of "peak" phenomena, namely peak oil, peak water, peak phosphorus, peak grain and peak fish. Growing populations, falling energy sources and food shortages will create the "perfect storm" by 2030, according to the UK government chief scientist. He said food reserves are at a 50-year low but the world requires 50% more energy, food and water by 2030.[97][98] The world will have to produce 70% more food by 2050 to feed a projected extra 2.3 billion people and as incomes rise, the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) warned.[99] Social scientists have warned of the possibility that global civilization is due for a period of contraction and economic re-localization, due to the decline in fossil fuels and resulting crisis in transportation and food production.[100][101][102] One paper even suggested that the future might even bring about a restoration of sustainable local economic activities based on hunting and gathering, shifting horticulture, and pastoralism.[103] In 2003, 29% of open sea fisheries were in a state of collapse.[104] The journal Science published a four-year study in November 2006, which predicted that, at prevailing trends, the world would run out of wild-caughtseafood in 2048.[105]

Health
Further information: Globalization and disease Globalization has also helped to spread some of the deadliest infectious diseases known to humans.[106] Starting in Asia, the Black Death killed at least one-third of Europe's population in the 14th century.[107]Even worse devastation

was inflicted on the American supercontinent by European arrivals. 90% of the populations of the civilizations of the "New World" such as the Aztec, Maya, and Inca were killed by small poxbrought by European colonization. Modern modes of transportation allow more people and products to travel around the world at a faster pace, but they also open the airways to the transcontinental movement of infectious disease vectors.[108] One example of this occurring is AIDS/HIV.[109] Due to immigration, approximately 500,000 people in the United States are believed to be infected with Chagas disease.[110] In 2006, the tuberculosis (TB) rate among foreign-born persons in the United States was 9.5 times that of U.S.-born persons.[111]

Global market
Expansion
A flood of consumer goods such as televisions, radios, bicycles, and textiles into the United States, Europe, and Japan has helped fuel the economic expansion of Asian tiger economies in recent decades.[112]However, Chinese textile and clothing exports have recently[when?] encountered criticism from Europe. This criticism has been settling after Beijing and Brussels reached a compromise. Still in 2004, EU China sold textiles worth about 514 million euros, while the value of Chinese apparel exports to the EU amounted to 16 billion euros and these mighty exports from China results job losses. In France, ceased to exist about 7 thousand. Positions in Spain 70 thousand, about 200 thousand in Italy.[113] the United States and some African countries.[114][115] As of April 26, 2005 Asia Times article notes that, "In regional giant South Africa, some 300,000 textile workers have lost their

jobs in the past two years due to the influx of Chinese goods".[116] The increasing U.S. trade deficit with China has cost 2.4 million American jobs between 2001 and 2008, according to a study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).[117] From 2000 to 2007, the United States had lost a total of 3.2 million manufacturing jobs.[118] A report issued in 2007 by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP predicted that by 2050 the economies of the E7 emerging economies (the BRIC countries: China, India, Brazil, and Russia, plus Mexico, Indonesia and Turkey) will be around 50% larger than the current G7 (US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Canada). China is expected to overtake the US as the largest economy around 2025, while India will overtake the US in 2050.[119] A more recent report issued by Goldman Sachs that was compiled after China released their GDP growth figures for 2009 predicted that China is about to overtake Japan and may become the world's largest economy by 2020.[120] (See the entry on BRIC for more details)

Financial interdependency
The world today is so interconnected that the collapse of the subprime mortgage market in the U.S. led to a global financial crisis and recession on a scale not seen since the Great Depression.[121] According to critics, government deregulation and failed regulation of Wall Street's investment banks were important contributors to the subprime mortgage crisis.[122][123]

Drug and illicit goods trade

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) issued a report that the global drug trade generates more than $320 billion a year in revenues.[124] Worldwide, the UN

estimates there are more than 50 million regular users of heroin, cocaine and synthetic drugs.[125] The international trade of endangered species is second only to drug trafficking.[126] Traditional Chinese medicine often incorporates ingredients from all parts of plants, the leaf, stem, flower, root, and also ingredients from animals and minerals. The use of parts of endangered species (such as seahorses, rhinoceros horns, saiga antelope horns, and tiger bones and claws) has created controversy and resulted in a black market of poachers who hunt restricted animals.[127][128]

Debate
See also: Alter-globalization, Participatory economics, and Global Justice Movement In recent years, debates about globalization have tended to descend into polemics and confusion as opinions have become increasingly politicized. There is little common ground between proponents and opponents of globalization.[129]

Politicization in the United States

The study by Peer Foiimkomjlss and Paul Hirsch suggests that the politicization of this discourse has emerged largely in response to greater US involvement with the international economy. For example, their survey shows that in 1993 more than 40% of respondents were unfamiliar with the concept of globalization. When the survey was repeated in 1998, 89% of the respondents had a polarized view of globalization as being either good or bad.[130] At the same time, discourse on globalization, which was at first confined largely to the financial community, started to focus

instead on an increasingly heated debate between proponents of globalization and a dipartite group of disenchanted students and workers. Polarization increased dramatically after the establishment of the WTO in 1995; this event and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-globalization movement.[131] Their study shows that, the neutral frame was the dominant frame in newspapers articles and corporate press releases prior to 1989. Both media depicted globalization as a natural development that related to technological advancement. In 1986, for example, nearly 90% of newspaper articles exhibited neutral framing. The situation started to change after the collapse of the stock market in Oct.19, 1987 and the subsequent recession. Newspapers began to voice concerns about the trend toward globalization and the interconnectedness of international financial markets. By 1989, the number of positively and negatively framed articles had eclipsed the number of neutrally framed articles. By 1998, neutrally framed articles had been reduced to 25% of the total. The study also shows an especially large increase in the number of negatively framed articles. Prior to 1995, positively framed articles were more common than negatively framed articles, however, by 1998, the number of negatively framed articles was double that of positively framed articles.[132] A recent article in the Wall Street Journal[133] suggests that this rise in opposition to globalization can be explained, at least in part, by economic self-interest. Initially, college educated workers were the most likely to support globalization. Less educated workers, who were more likely to compete with immigrants and workers in

developing countries, tended to oppose globalization. The situation changed radically when white collar workers started to blame immigration and globalization for their own increased economic insecurity. According to a poll conducted for the Wall Street Journal and NBC News, in 1997, 58% of college graduates said globalization had been good for the U.S. while 30% said it had been bad. When the poll asked a similar question in 2008 (after the financial crisis of 2007), 47% of graduates thought globalization was bad and only 33% thought it was good. Respondents with high school education, who were always opposed to globalization, became more opposed.[134]

Other industrialized countries

Philip Gordon, in a recent article in Yale Global, states that (as of 2004) a clear majority of Europeans believe that globalization can enrich their lives, while believing the European Union can help them take advantage of globalizations benefits while shielding them from its negative effects. [135] The main opposition consists of leftwing socialists, environmental groups, and right-wing nationalists. Part of the reason for the difference in response to globalization in US and EU lies in the fact that workers in the US have been more strongly impacted by factors like automation and outsourcing than their European counterparts. Income Inequality in the US, for example, is now much higher than in the EU.[136] Gordon points out that workers in the EU feel less threatened by globalization. First, the job market in the EU is more stable than that of the US, and workers in the EU are less likely to accept wage cuts or loss of benefits. Second, social spending by

governments in the EU is much higher than in the US. The situation is very different in the US, where there is a strong sense of individualism.[137] In Japan, the debate takes a different form. According to Takenaka Heizo and Chida Ryokichi, there is a perception that the economy is Small and Frail, which seems ironic in a country that accounts for one-quarter of all production. However Japan is resource poor and must promote exports in order to import the raw materials it needs. Anxiety over their position has caused terms like internationalization andglobalization to become part of everyday language in Japan. The Japanese accept that internationalization and globalization cannot be avoided. However, their resource dependency requires them to be as self-sufficient as possible in sectors like agriculture. Most discourse, therefore, centers on the notion of selfsufficiency.[138] The situation may have changed after the financial crisis of 2007. A recent BBC World Public Poll taken between October 31, 2007 and January 25, 2008, suggests that opposition to globalization in industrialized countries may be increasing. Unfortunately, it is difficult to compare the results with the polls mentioned above; those polls asked whether the overall effect of globalization was good or bad, whereas the BBC poll asked whether globalization was growing too rapidly. The countries where people are most likely to say that globalization is growing too fast are France, Spain, Japan, South Korea, and Germany. There is even the suggestion that the trend in these countries is even stronger than in the United States.[139] The poll also correlates the tendency to view

globalization as proceeding too rapidly with a perception of growing economic insecurity and social inequality.

Developing world
A number of international polls have shown that residents of developing countries tend to view globalization more favorably than residents of the US or the EU.[140] However, a recent poll undertaken by the BBC indicates that there is a growing feeling in the Third World that globalization is proceeding too rapidly. There are only a few countries, including Mexico, the countries of Central America, Indonesia, Brazil and Kenya, where a majority felt that globalization is growing too slowly.[141] Many in the Third World see globalization is a positive force that lifts countries out of poverty.[142] The opposition often combines environmental concerns with nationalism. Governments are often seen as agents ofneocolonialism that open the doors to an invasion of multinational corporations.[143] Much of this criticism comes from the established middle class; a report from the Brookings Institute suggests this is because the middle class perceive upwardly mobile low-income groups to be a threat to their economic security.[144] Although many critics blame globalization for a decline of the middle class in industrialized countries, a recent report in The Economist suggests that the middle class is growing rapidly in the Third World.[145]Unfortunately, this growth, coupled with growing urbanization, has led to increasing disparities in wealth between urban and rural areas.[146] This leads to a situation where those who have gained the least economically have the most to lose from the negative environmental impact of globalization. For

example, in India 70% of the population lives in rural areas and depend directly on access to natural resources for their livelihood.[143] As a result, anti-globalization often takes the form of mass movements in the countryside.[147] The situation is critical in China, where rapid growth has led to a situation where 0.4% of the population possess 70% of the nations wealth.[148] An 2007 article in The Economist blamed increasing unrest in rural China on the growing gap in wealth between rural and urban areas.[149] This, plus growing worker discontent in industrialized areas,[150] has caused a great deal of concern among the nation's leadership

Alternative interpretations
The analysis presented above focuses on the politicization of discourse and the way politically motivated actors represent globalization to the public; it is more interested in the process of politicization than in themeanings of globalization. It is also possible to examine discourse on globalization in terms of these meanings and their implications for the understanding issues like national autonomy and sovereignty. For example, David Held and Anthony McGrew, in an article in The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World, have suggested that this discourse can be separated into three frames. 1) Hyperglobalists hold that autonomy and sovereignty of nation-states have been eclipsed by contemporary processes of economic globalization. 2) Sceptics hold that intensity of contemporary global interdependence is considerably exaggerated and that the hyperglobalists ignore the continued primacy of national power and sovereignty.

3) Transformationalists emphasize the way in which globalization has brought about the spatial re-organization and re-articulation of economic, political, military and cultural power.[151] Peer Fiss and Paul Hirsch, in an article on the discourse of globalization, suggested using the notion of framing as a way to study this polarization. By framing, they mean the way interested actors and entrepreneurs articulate particular versions of reality to potential supporters [152] They identified three main frames: 1) The positive frame points to the potential gains and benefits of globalization. 2) The neutral frame portrays globalization as a natural, evolutionary, and largely inevitable development. This discourse, which is associated with the financial community, avoids making moral judgments. 3) The negative frame points out the increasing potential for economic crisis, the threat to the livelihoods of workers, and the growing income inequality caused by globalization. This frame also includes discourse which is primarily concerned with the negative impact of globalization in the Third World. To which we should add a fourth, newly emergent frame: 4) The constructive frame is an emerging frame that is more positive and constructive than the negative frame. This discourse supports global cooperation and interaction while opposing some of the negative effects of globalization.[citation needed]

Advocates
1) Neo-Liberalism

The majority of books, newspaper articles and press releases in this frame represent the neo-liberal view of globalization. Supporters of free trade claim that it increases economic prosperity as well as opportunity, especially among developing nations, enhances civil liberties and leads to a more efficient allocation of resources. Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower prices, more employment, higher output and a higher standard of living for those in developing countries.[153][154] Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism, and some libertarians, say that higher degrees of political and economic freedom in the form of perceived democracy and capitalism in the developed world are ends in themselves and also produce higher levels of material wealth. They see globalization as the beneficial spread of liberty and capitalism.[153] Supporters of democratic globalization are sometimes called pro-globalists. They believe that the first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be followed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens. 2) Global Village An optimistic view of globalism is suggested by Marshall McLuhan's of the Global Village [155] This view suggests that globalization will lead to a world where people from all countries will become more integrated and aware of common interests and shared humanity.[156] 3) Importance of international cooperation

A third body of literature points out the value of international cooperation in solving problems of mutual concern ranging from human-rights issues to environmental concerns such as global warming. This view is similar to that represented by the constructive frame. 4) World government Dr. Francesco Stipo, Director of the United States Association of the Club of Rome, writes in favor of political globalization in the form of a world government, suggests that it "should reflect the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and the world authority would have power within their sphere of competence".[157] Some, such as former Canadian Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.

Practical approach
This involves a form of discourse that portrays globalization as a natural, evolutionary, and largely inevitable development. This type of discourse, which is characteristic of the financial community, has become less prominent as the issue of globalization has become increasingly politicized. For example, a study of newspaper articles has shown that the percentage of articles exhibiting neutral framing decreased from nearly 90% in 1986 to around 25% in 1998.[152] It should be noted, however, that the number of newspaper articles dealing with globalization increased

almost tenfold during that period.[158] Therefore, the total number of neutral articles has probably increased. Examples of literature associated with this frame would include textbooks, books on international finance, and articles on globalization found in financial journals like the Wall Street Journal.

Critics
Since 1991, this discourse has been increasing rapidly in importance in the United states; the number of newspaper articles showing negative framing rose from about 10% of the total in 1991 to 55% of the total in 1999. This increase occurred during a period when the total number of articles concerning globalization nearly doubled. [132] This discourse takes two very different forms: 1) Concern over economic well being in developed countries In industrialized countries discourse about globalization centers on economic self-interest. Newspaper articles about globalization typically express concerns involve the interconnectedness of international financial markets and the potential for economic crisis, as well as threats to the livelihood of workers.[152] 2) Concern over the impact of globalization in developing countries The establishment of the WTO in 1995 and subsequent protests led to a large-scale anti-globalization movement that is primarily concerned with the negative impact of globalization in developing countries. Their concerns range from environmental issues to issues like democracy, national sovereignty and the exploitation of workers. (See

the following discussion on the anti-globalization movement). Individuals who associate themselves with the antiglobalization movement in industrialized countries comprise a relatively small but vocal minority. They are disproportionately middle-class and college-educated. This contrasts sharply with the situation in developing countries, where the anti-globalization movement has been more successful in achieving a broader, more balanced social class composition, with millions of workers and farmers getting actively involved.[159]

Common ground
This discourse involves a synthesis combining elements of all three of the above forms. It is practical, insofar as it accepts the reality of international integration and attempts to work within it. It is positive in that it believes that international cooperation can provide solutions to important problems. At the same time, it recognizes the negative aspects of globalization and proposes ways to mitigate their impact. Beginning in 2001 with the World Social Forum (WSF), there has been a movement consisting of individuals trying to bring about this type of synthesis. It is associated with the term Alter-globalization (oraltermondialization), a positive spin on the term anti-globalization. Members of this movement support the international integration of globalization, but demand that values of democracy, economic justice, environmental protection, and human rights be put ahead of purely economic concerns. This movement is discussed at length in the section Alterglobalization.

Anti-globalization movement
Main article: Anti-globalization movement See also: Alter-globalization, Participatory economics, and Global Justice Movement "Anti-globalization" can involve the process or actions taken by a state or its people in order to demonstrate its sovereignty and practice democratic decision-making. Antiglobalization may occur in order to maintain barriers to the international transfer of people, goods and beliefs, particularly free market deregulation, encouraged by business organizations and organizations such as the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization. Moreover, as Naomi Klein argues in her book No Logo, anti-globalism can denote either a single social movement or an umbrella term that encompasses a number of separate social movements[160] such as nationalists and socialists. Some people who are labeled "anti-globalist" or "sceptics" (Hirst and Thompson)[161] consider the term to be too vague and inaccurate.[162][163] Podobnik states that "the vast majority of groups that participate in these protests draw on international networks of support, and they generally call for forms of globalization that enhance democratic representation, human rights, and egalitarianism." Joseph Stiglitz and Andrew Charlton write:[164] The template Cquote is
being considered for deletion .

The anti-globalization movement developed in opposition to the perceived negative aspects of globalization. The term 'anti-globalization' is in

many ways a misnomer, since the group represents a wide range of interests and issues and many of the people involved in the anti-globalization movement do support closer ties between the various peoples and cultures of the world through, for example, aid, assistance for refugees, and global environmental issues. Some members aligned with this viewpoint prefer instead to describe themselves as the "Global Justice Movement", the "Anti-Corporate-Globalization Movement", the "Movement of Movements" (a popular term in Italy), the "Alter-globalization" movement (popular in France), the "Counter-Globalization" movement, and a number of other terms. Critiques of the current wave of economic globalization typically look at both the damage to the planet, in terms of the unsustainable harm done to the biosphere, as well as the human costs, such as poverty, inequality, miscegenation, injustice and the erosion of traditional culture which, the critics contend, all occur as a result of the economic transformations related to globalization. They challenge directly the metrics, such as GDP, used to measure progress promulgated by institutions such as the World Bank, and look to other measures, such as the Happy Planet Index,[165] created by the New Economics Foundation.[166]They point to a "multitude of interconnected fatal consequencessocial disintegration, a breakdown of democracy, more rapid and extensive deterioration of the environment, the spread of new diseases, increasing poverty and alienation"[167] which they claim are the unintended but very real consequences of globalization.

The terms globalization and anti-globalization are used in various ways. Noam Chomsky believes that[168][169] The template Cquote is being considered for deletion .

The term "globalization" has been appropriated by the powerful to refer to a specific form of international economic integration, one based on investor rights, with the interests of people incidental. That is why the business press, in its more honest moments, refers to the "free trade agreements" as "free investment agreements" (Wall St. Journal). Accordingly, advocates of other forms of globalization are described as "antiglobalization"; and some, unfortunately, even accept this term, though it is a term of propaganda that should be dismissed with ridicule. No sane person is opposed to globalization, that is, international integration. Surely not the left and the workers movements, which were founded on the principle of international solidarity that is, globalization in a form that attends to the rights of people, not private power systems.

The template Cquote is being considered for deletion .

The dominant propaganda systems have appropriated the term "globalization" to refer to the specific version of international economic integration that they favor, which privileges the rights of investors and lenders, those of people being incidental. In accord with this usage, those

who favor a different form of international integration, which privileges the rights of human beings, become "anti-globalist." This is simply vulgar propaganda, like the term "anti-Soviet" used by the most disgusting commissars to refer to dissidents. It is not only vulgar, but idiotic. Take the World Social Forum, called "antiglobalization" in the propaganda system which happens to include the media, the educated classes, etc., with rare exceptions. The WSF is a paradigm example of globalization. It is a gathering of huge numbers of people from all over the world, from just about every corner of life one can think of, apart from the extremely narrow highly privileged elites who meet at the competing World Economic Forum, and are called "pro-globalization" by the propaganda system. An observer watching this farce from Mars would collapse in hysterical laughter at the antics of the educated classes. Critics argue that globalization results in:

Poorer countries suffering disadvantages: While it is true that globalization encourages free trade among countries, there are also negative consequences because some countries try to save their national markets. The main export of poorer countries is usually agricultural goods. Larger countries often subsidise their farmers (like the EU Common Agricultural Policy), which lowers the market price for the poor farmer's crops compared to what it would be under free trade.[170] (See Agricultural subsidy for more information.)

The exploitation of foreign impoverished workers: The deterioration of protections for weaker nations by stronger industrialized powers has resulted in the exploitation of the people in those nations to become cheap labor. Due to the lack of protections, companies from powerful industrialized nations are able to offer workers enough salary to entice them to endure extremely long hours and unsafe working conditions, though economists question if consenting workers in a competitive employers' market can be decried as "exploited". It is true that the workers are free to leave their jobs, but in many poorer countries, this would mean starvation for the worker, and possible even his/her family if their previous jobs were unavailable.[171] The shift to outsourcing: Globalization has allowed corporations to move manufacturing and service jobs from high cost locations to locations with the lowest wages and worker benefits. This results in loss of jobs in the high cost locations while creating great economic opportunities in poorer countries.[81] Weak labor unions: The surplus in cheap labor coupled with an ever growing number of companies in transition has caused a weakening of labor unions in the United States. Unions lose their effectiveness when their membership begins to decline. As a result unions hold less power over corporations that are able to easily replace workers, often for lower wages, and have the option to not offer unionized jobs anymore.[170] An increase in exploitation of child labor: for example, a country that experiencing increases in labor demand because of globalization and an increase the demand for goods produced by children, will experience greater a

demand for child labor. This can be "hazardous" or "exploitive", e.g., quarrying, salvage, cash cropping but also includes the trafficking of children, children in bondage or forced labor, prostitution, pornography and other illicit activities.[172] In December 2007, World Bank economist Branko Milanovic has called much previous empirical research on global poverty and inequality into question because, according to him, improved estimates of purchasing power parity indicate that developing countries are worse off than previously believed. Milanovic remarks that "literally hundreds of scholarly papers on convergence or divergence of countries incomes have been published in the last decade based on what we know now were faulty numbers." With the new data, possibly economists will revise calculations, and he also believed that there are considerable implications estimates of global inequality and poverty levels. Global inequality was estimated at around 65 Gini points, whereas the new numbers indicate global inequality to be at 70 on the Gini scale.[173] The critics of globalization typically emphasize that globalization is a process that is mediated according to corporate interests, and typically raise the possibility of alternative global institutions and policies, which they believe address the moral claims of poor and working classes throughout the globe, as well as environmental concerns in a more equitable way.[174] The movement includes church groups, national liberation factions, peasant unionists, intellectuals, artists, protectionists, anarchists, those in support of relocalization and others. Some are reformist, (arguing for a more moderate form of capitalism) while others are

more revolutionary (arguing for what they believe is a more humane system than capitalism) and others are reactionary, believing globalization destroys national industry and jobs. One of the key points made by critics of recent economic globalization is that income inequality, both between and within nations, is increasing as a result of these processes. One article from 2001 found that significantly, in 7 out of 8 metrics, income inequality has increased in the twenty years ending 2001. Also, "incomes in the lower deciles of world income distribution have probably fallen absolutely since the 1980s". Furthermore, the World Bank's figures on absolute poverty were challenged. The article was skeptical of the World Bank's claim that the number of people living on less than $1 a day has held steady at 1.2 billion from 1987 to 1998, because of biased methodology.[175] A chart that gave the inequality a very visible and comprehensible form, the so-called 'champagne glass' effect,[176] was contained in the 1992 United Nations Development Program Report, which showed the distribution of global income to be very uneven, with the richest 20% of the world's population controlling 82.7% of the world's income.[177] Distribution of world GDP, 1989 Quintile of Population Income Richest 20% 82.7%

Second 20% Third 20% Fourth 20% Poorest 20%

11.7% 2.3% 2.4% 0.2%

Source: United Nations Development Program. 1992 Human Development Report[178] Economic arguments by fair trade theorists claim that unrestricted free trade benefits those with more financial leverage (i.e. the rich) at the expense of the poor.[179] Americanization related to a period of high political American clout and of significant growth of America's shops, markets and object being brought into other countries. So globalization, a much more diversified phenomenon, relates to a multilateral political world and to the increase of objects, markets and so on into each others countries. Critics of globalization talk of Westernization. A 2005 UNESCO report[180] showed that cultural exchange is becoming more frequent from Eastern Asia but Western countries are still the main exporters of cultural goods. In 2002, China was the third largest exporter of cultural goods, after the UK and US. Between 1994 and 2002, both North America's and the European Union's shares of cultural exports declined, while Asia's cultural exports grew to surpass North America. Related factors are the fact that

Asia's population and area are several times that of North America. Some opponents of globalization see the phenomenon as the promotion of corporatist interests.[181] They also claim that the increasing autonomy and strength of corporate entities shapes the political policy of countries.[182][183]