Impacts of Globalisation to Society

Introduction

The assertion that the world has reduced to a small global village could not be further from the truth. In the first place, the aim of any business establishment is to grow, expand and survive in the increasingly dynamic and competitive markets. When firms saturate their home markets with their products and all opportunities for growth are exploited, they usually eye and strategize to go international (Bentley & Ziegler 2006). With that in mind, globalisation can be defined as the process of international integration characterised by interchange of products, cultures, education and ideas among countries. Globalisation is a key factor in interdependence among nations particularly in trade and economic wellbeing.

Over the last one century, development of excellent communication and transport networks led to a boom in trade and increased competition among firms. Again, most countries in the world have performed exemplary well economically and the levels of disposable incomes have gone up (OECD Publishing 2002). As a result, such countries were classified as emerging markets which were attractive destinations for trade and investment. Increased foreign demand and interdependence among countries led to establishment of subsidiaries of corporate entities in other countries (K. Zeng 2014). For these reasons, many firms extended their operations by exploiting opportunities in other countries. Thence, such firms were termed as multinationals and are critical players in exchange of technology, culture, ideas, products and services.

Given the importance of globalisation in promoting cultural, technological, educational and political exchanges, its positive and negative impacts are felt globally. However, the positive impacts overshadow the negative effects because globalisation leads to improved productivity. As a result, the thesis for this paper is globalisation is good for the society since it has led to interchange of cultural, technological and educational values that have contributed to betterment of lives. Despite the benefits accrued to countries due to globalism, it has its fair share of criticism. This paper discusses the advantages of globalisation and provides a corresponding refutation of equal measure and similar context.

In the first place, globalisation has played a critical role in improvement of quality of goods and services and a wide variety of goods to the consumers. Besides, increased competition brought by multinationals has led to reduction in prices of goods and services (OECD Publishing 2002). Before the onset of globalisation, some markets were characterised by limited amount of goods of low quality and high prices. For instance, Asian and African markets. Again, there was no variety from which consumers could choose from. Today, most companies put up spirited efforts to enhance customer satisfaction through production of goods of high quality and selling at affordable prices (Wren 2006). As a matter of fact, customers can compromise the price but not the quality of products. As mentioned earlier, there are tens of substitutes that customers can choose from as a result of globalisation. In the era of globalisation, customers are highly valued and hence the pseudonyms such as “customer is king” and “the customer is always right”.

Quane (2015), provides a counter argument by stating that globalisation has led to monopoly of foreign companies and countless deaths of indigenous industries. When multinationals move into a host country, more often than not, the price of  labour and other pertinent costs are usually lower. Therefore, they usually produce goods at lower costs than in their parent countries. As a result, they engage in price wars and adopt business models that the weaklings in such industries cannot stand. For instance, many indigenous cotton and cloth manufacturing plants in Africa collapsed during the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s as a result of cheap clothing produced by foreign companies. In essence, such countries engaged in cost leadership wars with the indigenous countries because of their financial superiority and backing from their parent countries. As a result, the collapse of competitors led to monopoly statuses and such companies could exploit the markets in ways they deemed fit. With that in mind, the assertion that globalisation has contributed to improved quality of goods, affordability and wide variety of goods can be refuted on such grounds.

However, most governments have employed measures to control competition to avoid collapse of indigenous industries by enforcing competition rules (OECD Publishing 2002). As a result, indigenous countries are forced to style up and produce high quality goods at affordable prices to retain their share in the market.

Second, globalisation has led to transfer of sophisticated technologies and ideas from developed countries to less-developed countries and has spurred industrialization. When multinationals establish subsidiaries in other countries, they usually transfer their technologies to assist in operations. Such technologies have been instrumental in rapid development of countries particularly in Asia, South America and Africa. European and American multinationals have spread their techniques to many countries and they have contributed to positive development particularly in the shift from agriculture to manufacturing (Markusena & J. Venablesc 2009). The end result is that new technologies have led to establishment of new industries and consumers have a wide variety of products. Again, unemployment rates have gone down drastically due to emergence of employment opportunities from new establishments.

According to Michael, et al.(2005), most multinational companies guard they technologies with a flaming sword and do not expose them to local players. As a matter of fact, most multinationals have patented technologies that are considered as part of intellectual rights and trade secrets. For instance, software giants such as Microsoft, Oracle and Apple hire expatriates transfer expatriates from the parent companies in the United States and they handle top jobs. Domestic employees are employed where the risk of exposure of technologies is lower. Multinationals in the automobiles, engineering and manufacturing industries also practice the habit. As a result, transfer of technology has not helped in the industrialisation context (Wren 2006). In some cases, sharing technologies has led to negative results such as stealing them and producing copycat goods as it is the case with China. With that in mind, the most appropriate conclusion in this context would be that transfer of technology has led to reduction of unemployment rates and subsequently, a variety of goods and services for consumers.

Michael, et al.(2005), argument can be refuted with evidence-based arguments of how shared technologies have spurred industrialisation and growth in Israel, South Korea and Brazil to name but a few. Most governments place a legal duty to multinationals to assist in development through sharing ideas and knowledge. Additionally, the banking industry in the developing world is booming and multinational banks have been played instrumental roles in transference of banking technologies from the developed to the developing world.

Third, globalisation is key in cultural intermingling and people have become more tolerant towards others than before. The global village effect is magnified by globalisation because it has led to eradication of cultural barriers (Michael, et al. 2005). As a matter of fact, Western countries have used globalisation to spread democratic ideals to other African and Asian countries. For instance, before expatriates are sent from a parent country to a host country, they study the culture of the host country extensively for easier interaction. Besides, globalisation has led to tolerance among people separated by different classes. Some of the factors that have improved as a result of globalisation include but not limited to inter-racial marriages, decrease in racism and apartheid as well as emergence of new cultural hotspots in the Far East and South America.

Wettstein (2014), provides a counter argument by suggesting that globalisation has had negative impacts through transference of bad cultures particularly from the Western countries. With movement of large numbers of people into and out a given country, culture has been forced to take a backseat and such people adopt cultures of other countries. Most cultures have been lost particularly where the influence of globalisation is huge such as South Africa and Nigeria (Markusena & J.Venablesc 2009). The country is an emblem of the harmful effects of globalisation because traditional values have been abandoned and preference for hedonistic practices have taken a toll on the young population. The ways of life of the society have been changed as can be seen in dressing styles and lifestyles. For example, youth in developing countries have adopted Western culture of dressing skimpily and seek pleasure from risky behaviours such as taking alcohol, partying and consuming dangerous drugs.

Be that as it may, globalisation has played a key role in transference and interchange of positive cultures such as proper eating habits, good lifestyles and education. Similarly, cultural exchange has led to interchange of notions on being good citizens, leading responsible lives and playing part in the political, economic and social wellbeing. What is more, lifelong values such as confidence, abstractness of mind and competence are exchanged through globalisation. Overall, globalisation has played an important role in reducing the world into a global village and constant interactions have led to tolerance among communities and peace has prevailed. For these reasons, globalisation has contributed to interchange of cultural values that have created a window of opportunity for improvement and betterment of lives.

In conclusion, globalisation provided the leeway for global interdependence among countries. Movement of multinationals from developed to developing countries has spurred competition between rivals in industries leading to production of high quality goods at affordable prices. Again, consumers are provided with a wide variety of goods. Second, it has facilitated exchange of technologies that have shifted the countries from agricultural-based to industrial-based countries. Lastly, globalisation has led to exchange of cultural values that have fostered cultural tolerance and peace among countries. For these reason, globalisation is good for the society since it has led to interchange of cultural, technological and educational values that have contributed to betterment of lives. As a result, I agree, to a larger extent that that globalisation has had a positive impact on society.