# data[].attributes.headline
Globalization and Its
Impact on the Environment

# data[].attributes.subject
Globalization and Its
Impact on the Environment

# data[].attributes.body
Globalization has exposed different goods and services to people of various cultures, which has in turn increased demand and consumption of the these goods and services. Environmental activists have concerns that the increase in the demand of products has led to an increase in production of these goods and an increase in the fuel consumption to produce and ship them. Increases in fuel consumption therefore results in a rise in pollution levels.  Rises in pollution levels are attributed to production, which depletes the fragile ozone layer, increases pollutants in our soil, water and air supply. The increased production of goods also results in an rise in the volume of trash from packaging and materials once the goods are used, which means proper disposal of this trash becomes a major environmental concern on a global level.  Increasing globalization also results in encroachment on open land for production of manufacturing facilities and expansion of communities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Globalization has had far-reaching effects on our lifestyle. It has led to faster access to technology, improved communication, and innovation. Apart from playing an important role in bringing people of different cultures together, it has ushered a new era in the economic prosperity and has opened up vast channels of development. However, globalization has also created some areas of concern, and prominent among these is the impact that it has had on the environment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Facts About Globalization and its Alarming Impact on the Environment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Globalization has helped in the immense growth in international trade and finance. It has made countries to work more closely with each other and has led to several innovations in science and technology. However, it has contributed to environmental degradation as well.

# data[].attributes.body
This article primarily focuses on the negative effects of cultural globalization in Africa.  The worst materialistic aspects of the Western culture are referred to as a “tidal wave sweeping across the globe like a giant strawberry milkshake oozing over the planet, with a flavor that is distinctly sweet, sickly and manifestly homogenous”.  The use of seductive advertising along with globalization and the virtual dumping of foreign goods targeting younger people in these traditional societies is viewed as a means to escape from oppressive traditions. Africans have been led to believe that by holding dear their traditional values they are considered to be primitive, mindless, lazy, history-less, corrupt and underdeveloped to name a few. Globalization is resulting in the decimation of the African culture with entire languages and cultures disappearing forever along with cultural ideals of male and female roles, marriage, dress, food, work, etc.  Global culturalization is creating a homogenous society resulting in the destruction of diversity and that a decent human life cannot exist with an assortment of different cultures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by Wole Akande

Yellow Times
November 10, 2002

The aggressive spread of market economics and communication technologies - often under the control of Western multinationals - brings new challenges to local cultures and values in Africa and other non-Western societies. Sometimes it seems as if a tidal wave of the worst Western culture is creeping across the globe like a giant strawberry milkshake oozing over the planet, with a flavor that is distinctly sweet, sickly and manifestly homogenous.

Suddenly, people all over Africa and the rest of the non-Westernized regions of the world, appear to be imbibing materialistic and individualistic values previously associated with Western culture. What explains this apparently abrupt Westernization? One major reason is the structural change in the world economy: globalization and the flood of goods dumped in poor countries that are marketed by mass seductive advertising which is blatantly superficial but nonetheless successful in creating fresh desires in peoples of traditional societies.

For some, especially the young, these new products and content with new ideas can be exhilarating. Change may mean escape from oppressive traditions. It may also bring new opportunities for cultures to mingle in creative ways. Obviously, it would be an excessive form of cultural fundamentalism to suggest that Africans should try to keep everything exactly as it is, rather than allowing culture to develop. However, there is genuine cause for concern about the rate at which cultures (African and non-African) are being undermined in a world that is bound together by ever-stronger economic ties.

Starting in the sixteenth century, Western adventurers made a conscious effort to undermine the cultural heritage of various peoples around the world; this has been accomplished by imposing Western religion and cultural practices on those with a different way of life.

Justified initially as a civilizing mission and subsequently dubbed modernization, in practice it was wholesale Westernization with very little room for any viable middle ground. For instance, in the 19th century, Abeokuta (a town in West Africa), inspired by its Western educated former slaves, responded to the challenges of these pervasive foreign influences with a unique form of defensive modernization and reform which eventually crumbled under the weight of the overwhelming imperial British power. Accordingly, until the late twentieth century, it was assumed that development for the colonized peoples must involve a denial of their history, a rejection of their cultural heritage and the adoption of Western cultural practices.

The effect of this policy in the case of Africa, as Professor Andah once noted, was untold damage to the African psyche, "so much so that most Africans have come to believe as truth, the myths and lies about them as being primitive, history-less, mindless, cursed, lazy, inherently evil and corrupt, third world, underdeveloped."

In short, today, African culture has been decimated. More importantly, colonialism paved the way for today's cultural globalization by leaving the colonized in a state of cultural disorientation and consequently vulnerable to continuing cultural invasion. This disorientation manifests itself in one or two extreme forms:

1) exaggerated attachment to an often reinvented past in the name of tradition and culture; or
2) attempts at wholesale adoption of anything and everything foreign.

It may sound extreme but academic language studies have proven that particular aspects of culture can and do disappear forever; even optimistic estimates suggest that as many as 90 percent of the world's languages will disappear in the next century.

While an important feature of globalization today is its de-Westernization (with the emergence of some non-Western nations - like Japan - as key actors), the reality is that in many important respects, Western culture (some would say American culture) remains the domineering force in the world today. Western culture fuels globalization today and, as it did during the age of imperialism and colonization, helps to reinforce the hegemony of the West. Information technology, as the driving force of economic globalization, has also become a veritable instrument for propagating Western culture.

Perhaps by far the most important far-reaching effect of cultural globalization is the commercialization of culture. Production and consumption of cultural goods and services have become commodities, along with the essentials of social life (marriage and family life, religion, work and leisure), that are the crucibles of cultural creation. In a way very similar to economic globalization, most people (and especially the poor) do not experience cultural globalization on terms they have decided for themselves. Culture - whether it is music, food, clothes, art, sport, images of age or youth, masculinity or femininity - has become a product, sold in the market place. As the former chairman of Coca-Cola, Robert Goizueta, said: "People around the world are today connected by brand-name consumer products as much as by anything else."

The commercialization of culture has a disturbing impact on people. What once was an element of their way of life becomes a product, rather than something unique they had made to suit their own specific needs and circumstances. At the same time, people are increasingly bombarded with new images, new music, new clothes and new values. The familiar and old are to be discarded. While there was cultural change long before globalization, there is a danger that much will be lost simply because it is not valued by global markets. "In Ghana [West Africa]," says Siapha Kamara, formerly of the Ecumenical Training and Consultancy Centre, "traditional values have been overtaken by Coca-Cola culture. The Michael Jackson style of music and culture is taking over and we don't have the values to cope with it."

Consequently, it has been observed, globalized "cultural" industries are taking over traditional forms of creation and dissemination of culture. Local culture's role as a spontaneous and integral part of people's life is eroded and it ceases to serve as the means of constructing societal values, reproducing group identity and building social cohesion. The end result becomes global integration at the expense of local disintegration.

As with other markets, the players of the cultural market place are unevenly matched. Global media is increasingly in the hands of a few, large, powerful organizations, as is the production of music and film. For example, by 1997, the MTV television station was available to 280 million households in over 70 countries. Fearing a loss of viewers, local television stations in many African countries have filled their transmissions with cost effective Western produced shows, superficial news broadcasts, quiz shows and, of course, advertisements. Consequently, TV programs all over the world resemble each other more and more and so do the products in the field of music, film industry and publishing companies.

The common aspect of the globalized culture is that it pursues the same "one size fits all" ideal: the archetypical middle-class family according to the American model in which consumerism is the norm. The result of this cultural process of homogenization is that a large section of the world's population dreams of living like Cosby & Co. or like the characters in any other stereotype American soap opera. In addition, the dream of living a better life causes thousands of people to move to already overcrowded cities like Lagos, Nigeria's sprawling commercial capital; this city has grown from a population of 18,000 in 1901 to over 12 million in 2001. The majority of these new immigrants end up in slum quarters leading to poverty, pollution and misery.

Such a radical undermining of people's existing values and cultures has a corrosive impact on their sense of who they are, what they want and what they respect. It attacks spiritual values and faith traditions. The cumulative effect in Africa is a crisis of cultural confidence, combined with the increased economic uncertainty and crime which global integration often brings. This creates real problems for social solidarity, whether it is at the level of nation, community or family. While it offers shiny new goods as compared to old faded ones, the market offers no replacement for such community solidarity.

In conclusion, cultural globalization, or worldwide McDonaldization, destroys diversity and displaces the opportunity to sustain decent human life through an assortment of many different cultures. It is more a consequence of power concentration in the global media and manufacturing companies than the people's own wish to abandon their cultural identity and diversity.

*Wole Akande, a former opinion columnist with Ireland's Irish Examiner newspaper, is a freelance journalist. In addition to his work with YellowTimes.org, Wole also maintains http://www.abeokuta.org, a Nigerian community website. He is currently writing a book about Abeokuta's 19th century defensive modernization.

More Information on Globalization
More Information on Globalization of the Economy

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yellow Times November 10, 2002 The aggressive spread of market economics and communication technologies - often under the control of Western multinationals - brings new challenges to local cultures and values in Africa and other non-Western societies.

# data[].attributes.body
The increase in globalization and free trade means that people and goods are free to move with the decrease in borders. The disappearing borders place a burden on international organizations like the G8, WTO, WHO to name a few as they must consider the global impacts to increased health risks due to globalization and free trade.  This issue is extremely complex and includes direct and indirect delivery of healthcare, education, sanitation and water supply.  Trade opens up developing countries to tobacco, alcohol and food, which all can lead to increases in cancer, diabetes, obesity at an alarming rate. Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) increase the costs of medicines to treat these diseases. Healthcare costs and access to quality healthcare become a challenge.  An increase in international travel also increases the risk of spreading infectious diseases like SARS, Ebola and AIDS.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Every year, the same ritual takes place at changing locations in the Western world. While the heads of the eight leading industrialized nations meet at their annual G8 summit to discuss the global state of affairs, a wide variety of organizations and protesters meet in parallel to decry what they see as the negative effects of globalization. Notwith-standing these protests, whether one sees globalization as a tool to overcome poverty, hunger and disease in the world or whether one feels threatened by its consequences, one thing is certain: globalization is here to stay. Often narrowly defined as the increasing integration of the world's economies, globalization is in reality a powerful development that presents new challenges at the beginning of this millennium.

One major problem is the increasing internationalization of health risks. How-ever defined, this term has many dimensions, including economic, technological, political, social, scientific and cultural aspects. The links between globalization and health are complex and globalization is a multifaceted phenomenon that can affect health in myriad ways. Its consequences can be either direct, at the level of whole populations, individuals and healthcare delivery systems, or indirect, through the economy and other factors, such as education, sanitation and water supply ( Woodward et al, 2001). Given the enormous complexity and breadth of the issues, our article cannot hope to cover the entire range of topics that link globalization to health. Instead, we focus on those risks to health and health care that are related to central aspects of the globalization process, namely trade, travel and exchange of information.

A major factor for the liberalization of international trade has been the multilateral trade negotiations during the past 50 years, which culminated in the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) ( Bettcher et al, 2000). illustrates the significant increases in world trade since 1980. Although increasing trade is certainly good for economies, it also leads to a globalization of health risks. Important examples of such risks include tobacco, alcohol, global epidemics of non-communicable diseases and trade in health services.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the death toll from tobacco abuse alone will reach 10 million a year over the next two decades. Up to 70% of these deaths, caused by lung cancer, cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), lung diseases, diabetes and many other tobacco-related ailments, will occur in developing countries ( Murray & Lopez, 1997). These countries are at particular risk, as industrialized countries increasingly ban cigarette advertisements and tobacco companies intensively target people in poorer nations as potential customers. The high incidence of smoking among children and adolescents, and the disturbingly low age of initiation, raise additional concerns ( Global Youth Tobacco Survey Collaborative Group, 2002).

Alcohol consumption is another area in which the globalization of an industry has led to more health risks ( Jernigan, 1997). However, unlike tobacco use, which substantially increases the risk of mortality from an impressive array of diseases ( Doll, 1998), the impact of alcohol consumption on health is much more complex. There is a strong relationship between alcohol consumption and liver cirrhosis, some cancers, and most causes of injuries and violence, although minimal amounts of alcohol are sufficient to reduce the risk of CVD ( Beaglehole & Yach, 2003).

The spread of universal brand names of popular beverages and fast foods has ... contributed to the global epidemic of obesity by replacing traditional diets with fat- and calorie-rich foods

The WHO has estimated that by the year 2020, non-communicable diseases, such as cancers, diabetes, obesity and CVD, will cause about two-thirds of the global disease burden, up from 40% at present. This rapid increase again illustrates the globalized risks for conditions that are mainly caused by diet, even in less developed countries that have coexistent under-nutrition. There were 151 million cases of diabetes worldwide in 2001, and this is estimated to increase by 46% to 221 million cases in 2010, with the steepest growth in the developing world ( Zimmet et al, 2001). The same holds true for obesity ( Shell, 2001). Of course, not all of this is globalization's fault-these chronic or 'lifestyle' diseases are mainly caused by personal choice, that is, a sedentary lifestyle, the use of tobacco and a fat- and sugar-rich diet. Nevertheless, a key factor has been the unprecedented increase in the global food trade, and its domination by large transnational companies that have developed global brand names and aggressive marketing strategies adapted to local situations ( Chopra et al, 2002). The spread of universal brand names of popular beverages and fast foods has been especially rapid in the developing world during the past two or three decades and has contributed to the global epidemic of obesity by replacing traditional diets with fat- and calorie-rich foods. It is revealing that only a short period after their introduction on the Chinese market, 65%, 42% and 40% of consumers in China recognized the brands Coca Cola, Pepsi and Nestlé, respectively ( Lang, 2001).

Globalization of trade is also manifested in the implementation of the WTO's agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which extends patent protection on new drugs for a minimum period of 20 years. As a result of high prices, TRIPS threatens to limit and undermine access to new medicines, especially to poor populations living in the developing world ( Kamal & Bailey, 2003). In this sense, the implementation of TRIPS can be seen as exacerbating health risks. Trade and movement of infected cattle and poultry across national borders may also have contributed to recent outbreaks of mad cow disease in the Northern hemisphere and avian influenza in Asia.

TRIPS [WTO's agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights] threatens to limit and undermine access to new medicines, especially to poor populations living in the developing world

The globalization of trade is particularly relevant for health services that have become a commodity that can be traded in distinct ways. First, health services can be provided across borders. Examples include a range of telemedicine tools, such as tele-diagnostics and tele-radiology as well as medical consultation through traditional and electronic channels. Second, patients can travel abroad to receive health care or use certain facilities-the UK government recently allowed UK patients to seek treatment in the European Economic Area ( Lowson et al, 2002). Other countries, including developing ones such as Cuba and India, openly advertise to attract foreign patients to their clinics and hospitals. Third, health services themselves have become an industry that attracts foreign investments. Several transnational companies from developed and developing countries have already created commercial health services through the purchase and establishment of hospitals ( Chanda, 2002). Fourth, the international movement of health personnel across borders has become a significant component of the trade in health services and has attracted considerable attention in the scientific and lay press.

Similar to trade, globalization has had large effects on international travel, with serious consequences for global health. The liberalization of the airline industry in many countries has made air travel affordable for more and more people around the world, which has led to a dramatic increase in the amount of global air travel. Sutherst (2004) estimated that about one million people travel internationally every day and a similar number travel between developed and developing countries each week. Another recent report ( Gossling, 2002) put the number of global tourist arrivals per year at 700 million. Far-reaching air travel, aided by improvements in aircraft technology that allow longer nonstop flights, facilitates the spread of communicable diseases. It is entirely possible that a person in the early stages of an infectious disease could be halfway around the world in 12-15 hours and thus function as a vector for that disease, aiding its spread, perhaps into vulnerable, non-immune populations. The recent epidemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is the best contemporary example of the rapid spread of a hitherto unknown and virulent viral pathogen through travel of infected humans (, and ). SARS was first recognized in February 2003 in Vietnam where cases of atypical pneumonia with an unknown cause began to appear. By the first week of May 2003, 30 countries on six continents had reported a total of more than 7,000 probable cases with more than 500 deaths ( WHO, 2003a).

...a person in the early stages of an infectious disease could be halfway around the world in 12-15 hours and thus function as a vector for that disease...

Another example is the global spread of antibiotic-resistant Pneumococcus that was first identified in Spain in the early 1980s and rapidly jumped to South Africa and the USA before spreading to all other parts of the world ( WHO, 2000). Each year, approximately two million children die in developing countries as a result of lower respiratory infections, mostly pneumonia. The exact origin of this Pneumococcus strain is still unknown but is likely to come from the Far East ( McGee et al, 2001).

Perhaps the most profound changes that have taken place during the past 10 years have come through the globalization of ideas and information, facilitated through the revolution in information technology. The internet, satellite television broadcasting and high-speed data links across the globe have dramatically increased access to all kinds of information, even in the most remote corners of the world. Despite early concerns about a 'digital divide' that would further disadvantage the poor, these fears have been overestimated. The reality is that this divide is narrowing between rich and poor countries that have increasing access to cell phone communication and the internet (The Economist, 2004). The success of the food and tobacco industries' aggressive marketing strategies mentioned above have been closely linked to this information revolution.

Although better access to information is certainly a good thing, it has also created fears that freely available scientific information might be abused by terrorists ( Beck, 2003). Giving basically everyone who is interested access to the full sequences of human pathogen genomes, and the ongoing trend towards open access of published research ( Owens, 2003) and even ongoing research activities for new drugs ( Hubbard & Love, 2003), poses a serious dilemma with important implications for global health. Should the full sequence of the anthrax bacillus or smallpox virus and other virulent pathogens be published if this data could be used to develop biological weapons? Another example is the development of an improved virus to kill mice that has created fears that the enhanced virus could be used for bioterrorism ( Finkel, 2001). Al-Qaeda and the Japanese terrorist group Aum Shinrikyo might have planned to use published research data for nefarious purposes ( Petro & Relman, 2003).

There is another inherent danger that comes with the vast flood of information now available through the internet, namely the reliability and accuracy of health information from various web sites ( Eysenbach et al, 2002). Many such sites contain wrong, misleading and even dangerous information ( Crocco et al, 2002), and the lay public are often more confused than informed when they search for health advice.

Without doubt, globalization poses risks to global health, but it also provides benefits. The extraordinary improvements in information technology have dramatically increased the speed and ease of data flow, thereby facilitating the sharing of information. Medical discoveries made in one country can be made nearly instantaneously available to patients in other countries ( Wassenaar, 2003). It has also sped up the pace of discovery by linking researchers across the globe to work on the same problem, such as the response to SARS. Global cooperation of scientists linked through the internet resulted in the impressively rapid identification of the SARS virus and the development of a diagnostic test ( Gerberding, 2003). Similarly, the New England Journal of Medicine used the internet and electronic communication to review, revise and rapidly publish vital articles on the SARS epidemic ( Drazen & Campion, 2003).

And although many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) decry the negative effects of increasing globalization, they have also clearly benefited from it to improve healthcare delivery and health policy in many developing countries. A recent key contribution of the global NGO movement lies with the adoption of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). NGOs had an essential and vital role at the local, national and international levels in all development phases of the FCTC ( Mackay, 2003), and their contribution continues as they actively work with countries in the FCTC ratification process.

Globalization has also brought about improvements in research methodology, and some argue that clinical research has become more sophisticated as a result ( Wassenaar, 2003). Other benefits of globalization include cross-border use of health services that benefit patients and provide much needed resources to national health systems ( Jain, 2003) and improved regulatory practices ( Wassenaar, 2003). Finally, one should not underestimate the power of knowledge as it empowers populations and individuals and, in turn, allows them to hold to account their political and professional leaders ( Ellis, 2003).

As the major international agency dealing with global public health issues, the WHO-together with other international organizations-has an important role in mitigating the health risks posed by globalization. Through the FCTC, the WHO has tried to impose more stringent control on tobacco use in its member states. The policies recommend price and tax measures, protection from exposure to second-hand smoke, and regulation and disclosure of the contents of tobacco products. Packaging and labelling, advertising, promotion and sponsorship are also regulated, as are tobacco dependence and cessation measures, illicit trade, sales to and by minors, and liability ( Hammond & Assunta, 2003). In May 2003, the final draft of the FCTC was adopted by the 56th World Health Assembly. The treaty has been open for signature since June 2003 and will enter into force once it has been ratified by 40 parties. As of 1 July 2004, 167 countries and the European Community have signed the FCTC and 24 have ratified it, up from nine in March-impressive progress in just four months. The most recent public smoking bans in places such as New York City, Ireland and Norway are clearly further important steps towards protecting public health from the perils of tobacco smoke.

Another example of the WHO's key role in global public health are the International Health Regulations (IHR; WHO, 2004). These were used during the SARS epidemic to issue emergency travel advisories for several major cities in the world affected by the disease to discourage and restrict travel and thus contain the virus. These regulations were drafted to ensure maximum security against the international spread of diseases with minimum interference to world traffic. One of the oldest international political instruments, the IHR started as the International Sanitary Regulations in 1951 to provide a set of rules to protect the world from the spread of what were then referred to as 'quarantinable' diseases; in 1969, this became the IHR. It is now being revised with the goal of providing a framework within which the WHO and other agencies can help countries to respond to future global public health threats by directly linking IHR to the global alert and response network established by the WHO.

With regards to the epidemic of overnutrition as the main cause of many chronic, non-communicable diseases, some have suggested that the WHO should help to develop a coordinated global strategy on diet, physical activity and health ( Chopra et al, 2002). Such a strategy should include the use of policy, education and trade mechanisms to achieve its goal. To this end, the WHO advocates a healthier lifestyle-a recent joint WHO-FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) report recommends that consumption of added sugars, beyond those naturally present, should be less than 10% of the daily caloric intake ( WHO, 2003b).

...the development of an improved virus to kill mice...has created fears that the enhanced virus could be used for bioterrorism

Various national and international groups have also been concerned with the quality and accuracy of health information found on the internet. The WHO is leading an initiative to establish a health ('dot health') domain to enhance the credibility of information provided for public and personal health. The WHO proposed to restrict the use of health to content providers who would voluntarily abide by established quality and/or ethical standards. However, in November 2000, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) rejected the WHO's proposal because it was concerned by the vagueness of the WHO's standards for restricting registrars. Objections were also raised, notably by a multinational pharmaceutical company, "as to the appropriateness of according a degree of authoritativeness over the implied accuracy of health-care-related information to a single quasi-governmental organization" ( ICANN, 2000).

There have also been calls for a global oversight system to regulate and approve research on dangerous pathogens ( Steinbruner & Harris, 2003). Participating governments would be required to establish review bodies that regulate relevant research in this area. Such an approach must clearly involve the scientific community and must strike a balance between national security needs against the benefits of open scientific communication for future health improvement.

As pointed out above, globalization will not go away. It is therefore important to anticipate future challenges for global health and to consider how to react effectively. One major and increasing problem is the movement of health professionals from developing countries to high-income countries, which threatens the sustainability of health systems in the poor world. The Director General of the WHO, Lee Jong-wook, clearly highlighted this potential threat while addressing the 53rd session of the WHO Regional Committee for Africa: "Health systems depend most of all on skilled and dedicated personnel, and here we face big challenges, particularly in this region which, on top of everything else, suffers heavy losses to the brain drain" ( Lee, 2003). The extent of the problem has been highlighted previously ( Pang et al, 2002) and a recent survey from Lithuania, where 61% of medical residents and 26% of physicians surveyed said they intended to leave for the EU or other countries, illustrates well the potential magnitude of health professional brain drain ( Stankunas et al, 2004), not just for African countries.

However, the migration of health personnel raises a complex ethical dilemma. On the one hand, it appears unethical for developed countries, which often depend on foreign-trained physicians to address shortages in rural areas, to attract health professionals from poorer countries. On the other hand, it hardly seems ethical to prevent skilled workers in search of a better life from accepting better opportunities, financial or professional ( Scott et al, 2004). As borders disappear, there is an urgent need to develop strategies, at the national and international level, that will minimize the harm and maximize the benefits of the movement of health personnel. Equally urgent is the need for more information about this problem. There are surprisingly little data on the magnitude of the movement of health professionals between poor and rich countries, and few studies have examined the impact of brain drain on national health systems.

...freely available scientific information might be at risk of being abused by terrorists

Foreign direct investment in the health area, notably for the purchase and construction of medical facilities, also brings both opportunities and concerns. As mentioned previously, the presence of foreign commercial healthcare providers and transnational health services have the potential to benefit both patients and national coffers. However, one should not ignore the potential negative impact of privatized health care. A recent systematic review of private for-profit and private not-for-profit dialysis facilities in the USA found that haemodialysis care in not-for-profit centres was associated with a lower risk of mortality ( Devereaux et al, 2002). More research to examine the potential impact of foreign commercial presence and cross-border use of health services on health is needed so that regulations can be designed to maximize their benefits and protect patients.

As mentioned previously, if patent protection leads to prohibitively priced drugs, it undermines access to new medicines among the most vulnerable populations. The effects of the TRIPS agreement on pharmaceutical prices need to be documented, and the design and implementation of international agreements need to consider the potential effects on developing countries' health systems ( Woodward et al, 2001). Similarly, the Essential Drugs List, which guides the selection of drugs on the basis of public health relevance, efficacy, safety and cost, needs to remain an integral part of national drug policies ( Smith & Tickell, 2003).

There is sufficient evidence that globalization has resulted in higher tobacco consumption, notably in poorer countries ( WHO, 2001) and higher alcohol use, particularly among younger individuals ( Kuo et al, 2003). It is therefore essential that governments retain the ability within international agreements to regulate so that they can protect public health, especially the ability to restrict, and ban if necessary, advertising and lobbying activities. Finally, the ongoing review of the IHR process must transform these regulations into an effective tool that will allow countries to strengthen global disease surveillance and to respond efficiently to international public health emergencies.

The current models of international relations, mobility and movement of goods and people are responsible for the globalization of health risks. These developments clearly lead to an increase in health risks either directly or indirectly, particularly in the developing world where the benefits of globalization are often offset by its adverse effects. More insidiously, the threat of misuse of globalized information for bioterrorism purposes is becoming a serious concern for many governments. International organizations can have an important role in minimizing such risks through regulations, policy recommendations, advocacy and promoting dialogue among interested parties. In addition, to reap the benefits of globalization, we need novel approaches to international cooperation that place national self-interest in the context of global mutual interest and, in this way, promote international cooperation and goodwill ( Frenk & Gomez-Dantes, 2002).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Every year, the same ritual takes place at changing locations in the Western world. While the heads of the eight leading industrialized nations meet at their annual G8 summit to discuss the global state of affairs, a wide variety of organizations and protesters meet in parallel to decry what they see as the negative effects of globalization.

# data[].attributes.headline
Globalization: Rising Tide, Sinking Boats?

# data[].attributes.subject
Globalization: Rising Tide, Sinking Boats?

# data[].attributes.body
The 2016 Presidential race has highlighted the standard line that globalization and free trade have “winners” and “losers”. Candidates on the extreme left and right in America as well as other leaders around the world have basically said that the “losers” have reached the end of their rope and many citizens are becoming impatient. Job loses due to labor-intensive industries like the car and garment industries moving to countries across the globe where labor costs are a fraction of what they are in developed countries like America.  Communities have suffered from lose of jobs, abandoned factories, increased health care costs, increase in drug, alcohol and suicide rates.  Human capital is not fluid like financial capital.  Americans who worked in manufacturing jobs cannot make a quick transition to skilled labor jobs without suffering major financial set backs and losses.  This article also discusses the poor job in helping Americans displaced from their jobs as training or retraining is costly in both time and financially.  These Americans need immediate help and an education that will result in preparation for real jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The standard line about globalization (and its sidekick known as "free trade") is that there are "winners" and "losers" occasioned by the free flow of goods, services, and capital around the world. What we are seeing now in the global populist uprising against globalization and free trade -- Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders in the United States, Marine Le Pen in France, plus numerous extreme right and extreme left political parties around the world -- is that the "losers" have had enough. The economic theory isn't working for them, and many citizens are getting impatient. "Men eat before they reason" is an adage worth remembering.

A currency trader can sit at a computer terminal and convert dollars into Euros in a split second. A redundant garment worker, however, cannot overnight become a computer programmer -- and that fact is the central problem that proponents of globalization and free trade sometimes overlook or downplay.

The economic gains from free trade have been clear since Adam Smith wrote "The Wealth of Nations" in 1776 and David Ricardo discussed comparative advantage in 1817. One can quantify the gains -- low prices at big box consumer stores like Walmart and Target -- in graphs and mathematical formulas that are beyond dispute. Moreover, there have been many benefits brought to the (formerly) developing world in terms of higher living standards, rising incomes, and longevity. Some of globalization's critics, however, see these advances as also carrying a huge price: rising internal inequality in some developed countries.

What is less apparent -- and often lost in the discussion of overall net gains -- are the costs associated with the people who lose their jobs primarily because those jobs move to countries halfway around the globe where labor costs are often a fraction of what they are in, say, the (formerly) industrial Midwest. Has the cost of the auto industry job losses in Detroit, for example, or the textile industry job losses in New Bedford been factored into those gains? How does one put an economic value on the loss of community due to abandoned factories? Rising health care costs? Suicide rates? Alcohol and drug abuse? These pathologies abound in communities hard hit by the job losses stemming from globalization.

We must not embrace protectionism and certainly not champion the status quo over positive change. Doing so would mean continuation of horse-and-buggy transportation versus smart cars. But globalization is now playing a largely defensive game, precisely because it has not focused enough on how to cushion the downside losses. The old cliché about a rising tide lifting all boats doesn't cut it anymore. Unmet promises are no longer acceptable.

We know how to expedite global capital flows, but we aren't good at retraining laid-off machinists from Midwest and Northeast factories. The founders of free trade assumed that human capital was as liquid -- or almost as liquid -- as financial capital; it isn't, and it cannot be. In 1776, moving a family from Aberdeen to Glasgow was somewhat feasible. Today, moving from Edinburgh to Shanghai is less so.

For decades, though, we have talked a good game about providing financial and education assistance to those individuals harmed by free trade, but the results are uneven at best, pointless at worst. We have government programs, known as trade adjustment assistance, that are uncoordinated and simply inadequate when it comes to meeting the realistic retraining needs of many displaced workers. (The presidential candidates should be discussing these programs, by the way.)

Columbia University economist Jagdish Bhagwati, an ardent globalization supporter, has noted in his book, In Defense of Globalization, that "[e]conomics itself tells us that free trade ... can be unambiguously declared to be welfare-enhancing only if those who lose from it can be compensated by taking income from the winners while leaving the winners still better off." These offsetting policies typically take the form of additional unemployment insurance and/or adjustment assistance.

As Bhagwati notes, Americans seem far more understanding when a job migrates from Massachusetts to California than when it migrates from upstate New York to Vietnam. The latter example feeds into not only resurgent nationalism but also into the type of xenophobia prominent during much of the 2016 presidential campaign. Because there are so many policy decisions and economic actions that result in trade dislocations, Bhagwati concludes correctly that "it is surely more sensible ... to go for more general and comprehensive schemes such as unemployment insurance and retraining programs for all workers who are laid off, for instance."

Sounds good, of course, but the programs have to work, and work promptly. Otherwise, you may end up with even costlier protectionism.

Globalization's proponents (and its beneficiaries) must recognize that the globalization consensus can no longer be taken for granted. Life has to be about more than just cheaper clothing and slick smart phones, especially when individuals and communities are visibly hurting.

As a country, we also do a relatively poor job in another employment-related area: school-to-work transition. The hand-off after high school graduation in this country has become a costly failure: too many community college dropouts and four-year college dropouts waste too much time and money (in the case of money: their own, that of their families, and the taxpayers) pursuing work-related education that fails to equip them for work. If Germany can do a much better job in this regard, what is stopping the United States?

Entering the American workforce -- especially for people who need training or retraining -- has become too dysfunctional, costly, and wasteful (in both time and money) for those who need it the most. If the globalization consensus ever has a chance of being restored, its supporters will have to do a far better job of recognizing the losses, promptly compensating those who are hurt, and providing realistic education opportunities that result in real jobs. Touting the benefits is no longer enough.
Charles Kolb served as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy from 1990-1992 in the George H.W. Bush White House. He was president of the French-American Foundation - United States from 2012-2014 and president of the Committee for Economic Development from 1997-2012.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Globalization: Rising Tide, Sinking Boats?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The standard line about globalization (and its sidekick known as "free trade") is that there are "winners" and "losers" occasioned by the free flow of goods, services, and capital around the world.

# data[].attributes.headline
Globalization has lowered wages for American
workers, new EPI study finds

# data[].attributes.subject
Globalization has lowered wages for American
workers, new EPI study finds

# data[].attributes.body
While much of the debate in American politics focuses on how globalization and trade effect macroeconomics, there are critical microeconomic effects that must be strongly considered. Growing globalization and trade between the United States and developing countries like China and Mexico have moved labor-intensive industries out of the United States into these countries.  This has resulted in a widening gap between non-college educated and college-educated workers.  Working class Americans earn lower wages, while those Americans who are professionals or in skilled labor earn considerably more income.  The overvalued American dollar and trade impacts wages by making imports cheaper and exports more expensive, which has driven workers out of manufacturing jobs into service jobs.  Competition for these jobs is high, which also has led to reduction in wages for these jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While trade's impact on the American economy is a frequent topic in Washington, much of the debate centers on the macroeconomic effects of the trade deficit on GDP. However, trade has also had an important microeconomic effect. Growing trade between the United States and developing countries, particularly trade with China, has reduced wages for non-college educated American workers while increasing the wage premium earned by college-educated workers.

In Using standard models to benchmark the costs of globalization for American workers without a college degree, EPI Research and Policy Director Josh Bivens examines this less-discussed but important impact of trade. The paper finds that as labor-intensive industries move to developing nations, demand for labor in the United States decreases, thus reducing wages for non-college educated workers. At the same time, globalization increases demand in the United States for professionals, skilled labor and capital, thereby increasing incomes for college-educated workers and widening the gap between the rich and poor.

The paper finds that in 2011, international trade depressed wages for non-college educated workers by 5.5 percent, costing the average worker $1,800.

As a point of comparison, growing trade with poorer countries has cost the typical worker more than would result from recent proposals to make the Bush-era tax cuts permanent and to finance them with across-the-board cuts to transfer such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance and food stamps.

"While much of the debate over globalization has focused on the macroeconomic challenges of an overvalued dollar and a persistent U.S. trade deficit, there are other impacts of trade that are worth exploring," said Bivens. "Even if the value of the dollar reaches a sustainable level and we succeed in reducing or closing the trade deficit, working-class Americans will still face lower wages as a result of globalization. Policymakers should pay close attention to the effect of trade on wages. We need a trade policy that supports American workers."

Trade's impact on wages is made worse by an overvalued U.S. dollar, which acts to make imports cheaper and exports more expensive. Moreover, this effect extends beyond workers in tradeable sectors, since foreign competition drives workers out of sectors like manufacturing and into non-tradeable sectors, such as service jobs and construction. Increased competition for these jobs leads to further reductions in wages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Globalization has lowered wages for American workers, new EPI study finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While trade's impact on the American economy is a frequent topic in Washington, much of the debate centers on the macroeconomic effects of the trade deficit on GDP. However, trade has also had an important microeconomic effect. Growing trade between the United States and developing countries, particularly trade with China, has reduced wages for non-college...

# data[].attributes.body
This video explains pros and cons of globalization for developed and developing countries. When businesses in a developed country move their operations to a developing country, consumers in the developed country get an advantage when prices on goods are lower than before. The benefits for a developing country is that when the business from a developed country sets up shop with them, the citizens that live in that country now have job opportunities. Globalization benefits everyone, businesses especially, in terms of cost. Developing countries want and need the jobs the firms offer, which give them a wide range of choices. In the end, results may vary, but it is almost set in stone that multinational businesses and firms will be benefited by globalization and what comes with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The brief overview at some benefits and costs of globalization.

# data[].attributes.body
Globalization is taking a series of isolated economies into an integrated one. Every economies job, no matter the country, is to be thriving in successful, as that reflects the standard of living in the country itself. To countries with a decreased standard of living, globalization brings opportunities to usher their own goods into a global market, where they may be bought and traded. To those countries richer, and with a higher standard of living, receive a higher spending power in less-expensive imports. Even though those richer may loose jobs because of businesses being undercut, the generated wealth due to globalization has caused an increase in service-sector employment, which in itself provides those jobs. The positive key of competition once again comes into play, as it encourages firms and businesses to work harder at increasing the quality of their goods to keep them profitable on the market. People who once worked with simple textiles will grow into the fashion industry, and so on and so forth. This goes hand in hand with bringing more money to countries in poverty, and improving the overall standard of living in these places.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
There is talk of food miles, of buying locally, and of self-sufficiency, as if these were virtues. The good thing (my number nine) is globalization which gives us all access to each other's special skills and products.
9. Globalization
Over the course of decades globalization is turning the world into an integrated economy instead of what it has been for most of its history, a series of relatively isolated economies. The more trading that takes place, the more wealth is created, and global trade across international frontiers has created more wealth than ever before in human history, and had helped lift more people out of mere subsistence than ever before.

To poorer countries globalization brings the chance to sell their relatively low cost labour onto world markets. It brings the investment that creates jobs, and although those jobs pay less than their counterparts in rich economies, they represent a step up for people in recipient countries because they usually pay more than do the more traditional jobs available there.

To people in richer countries globalization brings lower cost goods from abroad, which leaves them with spending power to spare and a higher standard of living. It also brings opportunities for productive investment in high growth industries in developing countries.

Those adversely affected by the global exchanges are the people in rich countries whose output is now undercut by the cheaper alternatives from abroad. They often need to find new jobs or to be retrained to do work that adds higher value. The extra wealth generated by globalization has brought an increase in service sector employment, which provides many of the new jobs needed.

Competition from abroad forces firms to become more efficient and to use resources more efficiently. Often they choose to go upmarket, seeking higher added value products that face less competition from relatively unskilled labour. Thus firms which once sold cheap textiles move into fashion and design, and find customers among the rising middle classes in developing countries.

The integration of the world economy has brought with it an interdependence. As countries co-operate in trade with each other, they get to know each other and grow into the habit of resolving disputes by negotiation and agreement instead of by armed conflict. The 19th Century French economist Frederic Bastiat expressed this pithily: "Where goods do not cross frontiers, armies will."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There is talk of food miles, of buying locally, and of self-sufficiency, as if these were virtues. The good thing (my number nine) is globalization which gives us all access to each other's special skills and products. 9. Globalization Over the course of decades globalization is turning the

# data[].attributes.headline
Impact of Globalization: the Good, the Bad, and the Inevitable

# data[].attributes.subject
Impact of Globalization: the Good, the Bad, and the Inevitable

# data[].attributes.body
This article showcases more than just the pros of globalization. While the primary focus will be the good, the text also gives a very insightful explanation as to what globalization is and how it can make or break a country in many different ways. The biggest pro seems to be the idea of new solutions. Through globalization, the ideas that people have had for years can finally become a reality due to advanced technology and the widest audience possible. A big worry is the disastrous state of our environment, but because of the advances in education, technology, and social/global connectivity, scientists, politicians, and everyday people can work to right wrongs made in the past. It isn't just the issue of the environment that can be fixed, though. There's poverty, war, scarcity, inflation, etc. that all can be assessed much quicker if the world works together. Globalization is a gigantic first step.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Globalization is not a new concept in the world. It may be farther along and advancing at a faster rate than ever before, but globalization has been around for hundreds and, arguably, thousands of years. The Silk Road spanned one-sixth the diameter of the planet - literally connecting the West and the East - and began during the Han Dynasty (roughly 200 B.C.).

Integrating a global economy is nothing new, but the modern implications in global business are bigger and stranger than ever before. Below we examine what it means to play a part in a global market, but you can bring yourself up to speed with this course on the geography of globalization and how it simultaneously shapes our cultures and economic relationships.

What, Exactly, Is Globalization?

There are two ways of looking at globalization. One is as an accidental or inevitable affect of economic growth; industry, technology, communication, etc. As the economy grows, it is only natural for a global market to become established in previously local areas. For this to happen, free trade and the free movement of capital are essential. Globalization is not just expansion; it is, as Merriam-Webster nots, "an increasingly integrated global economy." For integration to occur, economic freedom is necessary. Expand your knowledge of our global economy with this five-star course on finding success in global business.

The second way of looking at globalization is as a deliberate process, and this is almost certainly more accurate. Yes, there is a degree of inevitability involved, but this is due in large part to the agreements made between nations, between corporations, etc. Business wants globalization and it has almost single-handedly caused it to happen. The Silk Road was not a humanitarian effort. It was about a vision of business. And these visions become grander and more easily conceived as technology and politics progress so fast that globalization does, after all, seem inevitable.

Globalization: A Purpose

There is not one purpose of globalization; there are many, many more than I can list. But from this point forward I want to abandon this general talk of globalization and focus solely on the economy; or, more specifically, globalization and business.

So why do businesses actively work to make globalization happen? An initial answer is easy: cheaper production costs and more consumers to sell to. Globalization has a hand even in the smallest businesses (at least, in first-world countries). And where do these businesses go for cheaper production costs? China is the cliche example, but other popular options include India, Brazil, Russia, Mexico, Bolivia, Indonesia and a number of Eastern European countries.

The first company I worked for when I lived in New York employed about 15 people, yet all of our production was out-sourced to China. Even a small business can benefit from the incredible production savings to be found overseas, and this (along with the obvious fact that there are more people to sell to) is why businesses actively and aggressively promote globalization.

If you need help expanding your own business, this course on international expansion will help you formulate an action plan to expand business through international sales and partnerships.

In the end, globalization is all about competition. Lower production costs? That's a competitive advantage. More consumers? Another competitive advantage. Untapped markets, different services, investment opportunities . . . all competitive advantages. As soon as the first company went global, everyone else had to follow suit to keep up. Globalization is about growth, sure, but it is also about establishing the ultimate competitive position: diverse resources, diverse interests, diverse markets, diverse acquisitions; in a word, a portfolio so diverse it can only be attacked piece-meal, i.e. the proverbial "unsinkable ship."

If you're anxious to learn how to create your own competitive advantage, check out this post featuring 7 competitive positioning tips and strategies.

The Benefits Of Globalization

For some people, globalization is synonymous with world destruction. In the end - who knows - maybe this will be true. But in reality there are many good things that have resulted from globalization. In this section, I will still focus on the economy, but I would also like to touch on some social advantages, as well. For more information regarding the positive impact of globalization, check out this blog post on the benefits of globalization in the modern era.

Many Americans do not appreciate how efficient our markets are (efficiency here meaning supply and demand). These efficient markets allow economies to grow, and in a global world, when one economy grows, it spurs growth in all the other economies that are connected to it. In this way, reverberations of success are felt across the world, even when they are most profound in one area. Needless to say, this is a very good thing.

This is partially a result of what I just mentioned, but wealth equality around the world goes much deeper than that. Perhaps a better phrase than wealth equality is "standard of living." Globalization does several things nobody can deny: it creates jobs, it improves infrastructure and it allows more people to live at a higher global level every day (access to medicine, clean water, food production, housing, etc.).

Globalization results in partnerships between countries and organizations. This makes relations much more stable between both. Agreements are agreed to, and as long as these are upheld, a kind of world-cooperation is sustained. Having these friends with (economic) benefits provides both stability and security for countries that wish to remain peaceful and prosperous.

This course taught by Dr. Bentkowska (PhD Economic Sciences) focuses on the research of legendary economist Paul Krugman and how international trade creates and affects a new geographic economy.

Globalization allows important processes to happen more efficiently and important ideas to become reality. There is a certain irony involved in this, however. For example, globalization is going to allow the world to work together to (hopefully) solve our apocalyptic environmental predicament; but of course, this predicament is a result of globalization.

Still, it allows the human race to push forward, which at this point we must recognize as a necessity of our species. Progress is written in our DNA, and globalization has allowed us to accomplish truly incredible things (the International Space Station being one of the most far-reaching).

The Disadvantages Of Globalization

Because globalization is 100% inevitable, we must tell ourselves that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. But do they? It depends where you're coming from, but let us first take a look at what these disadvantages are before we form an opinion. Get a different opinion from this post by Nick Gibson on the pros and cons of globalization.

Unfortunately, while competition is generally thought to be a good thing, it does not come without a sour side. If I were to say, "Some companies won't survive because of globalization," then you might say, "Then they don't deserve to survive; that's the beauty of it; the companies worth sticking around usually do."

I won't deny the truth in that, but what about the borderline monopoly that the largest companies in the world have created for themselves? Apple, Exxon, Google, etc. Whereas they were once innovators, they are now so big that politics and strategy are more important than innovation. The result of this is that smaller companies with innovative ideas have an incredibly difficult competing. And how can they? If they're lucky, they'll be bought out and walk away with a pay check; if not, they'll just be crushed, often purposefully, by a competitor that is literally a billion times bigger than them.

For tips on navigating international relations, invest in this International Relations 101 course that approaches the subject from a strategic economic perspective.

I was raised in what was once the Apple Capital of the World: Winchester, VA. Over the last two or three decades, this title has (inevitably) been stripped from us; first it was by Pennsylvania, but then Pennsylvania had it stolen by China.

So now China is the Apple Capital of the World. They produce the cheapest apples, which account for roughly half the world's supply of apples. A lot of people up and down the East Coast lost their jobs, but here's the kicker: China isn't allowed to export apples to the U.S. This might change soon, but for the time being, China is able to put a lot of people on the East Coast out of business without even selling apples in the same country.

The lesson of the story is that another country can do what you do better and put you out of business without even looking you in the eye. That's globalization. But to be fair, the damage we've done to China and the benefits we took advantage of (cheap labor) are vastly more significant. Sorry, did I say "to be fair"?

I hardly need to spell this out, but I will add a thought or two. Globalization has created a global-sized need for energy and industry, and this need has been abused and ignored to the extent that the future of life as we know it has been brought into question. You may or may not believe in global warming, but you cannot deny the existence of the conversation. Does the fact that this conversation is happening not say something in itself?

Have we bulldozed our planet into trouble? Obviously, yes. The argument against this fact is that we could not possibly have caused so much destruction to our enormous planet. The facts say otherwise: we've logged over half of the world's tropical forests. And as far as how difficult it would be to change the composition of the atmosphere? The atmosphere ends a mere 60 miles above the surface of the Earth. It's just not that voluminous. It's not limitless. It's actually small, and when we work together globally, even the negative side effects of all the amazing things we accomplish are, in a word, globalized.

Good, Bad, Inevitable

Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, globalization is simply and utterly good, bad and inevitable. Hopefully the good will out-weigh the bad, but the continued existence of both is inevitable. Because of this, we are better off accepting the truth and, like we do best, moving forward. But make no mistake: environmentalism is gaining speed. Whether you want to join the cause or just be on the front lines of a new opportunity, this course on energy, economics and the environment can help you make your choice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Impact Of Globalization: The Good, The Bad, The Inevitable

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Globalization is not a new concept in the world. It may be farther along and advancing at a faster rate than ever before, but globalization has been around for hundreds and, arguably, thousands of years. The Silk Road spanned one-sixth the diameter of the planet - literally connecting the West and the East - and began during the Han Dynasty (roughly 200 B.C.).

# data[].attributes.body
There is no doubt that globalization is here to stay worldwide. There's no denying that it exists and has happened, and almost no definite way to get rid of it. For these reasons, we must acknowledge the good things globalization has brought us. Global connectivity is a given. With use of the Internet, which has spread and advanced all over the world, we are able to communicate with people millions of miles away with just the push of a button. There are more options opening up everywhere, such as new business opportunities, which create new jobs. Transportation and tourism have also been improved because of advanced quality in imports and exports through free trade. None of this could have happened without globalization. Finally, the very influential and important topic of diversity. Through all stated above, cultures have managed to mix together and enjoy what the other has to offer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Globalization means increasing the interdependence, connectivity, and integration on a global level, with respect to the social, cultural, political, technological, economic, and ecological levels. It is the collaboration of countries to provide a boost to trade practices, and also to reduce cultural differences. Its various advantages can be felt all across the globe by one and all, and also to a very large extent in our daily lives.

Obviously, now we understand that globalization is here to stay. Here are the most common and important advantages that globalization, over time, has brought about for mankind. These have been listed in no particular order, and are all vital in their own way.

Peaceful Relations
Most of the countries have resorted to trade relations with each other in order to boost their economy, leaving behind any bitter past experiences if any. Nations now try to raise capital and fortify their stand in international trade, rather than hosting a war. Thus, globalization has induced international peace and security in a big way.

Free Trade
Free trade is a policy in which a country does not levy taxes, duties, subsidies or quota on the import/export of goods or services from other countries. There are countries which have resolved to free trade in specific regions. This allows consumers to buy goods and services, comparatively at a lower cost.

Global Connectivity
Globalization has promoted international connectivity. With the use of the Internet, the world has definitely become a smaller place. There has been exchange of thoughts and ideas which has morally boosted and interlinked the mindset of people all round the world.

New Markets
The opportunities for new markets has increased dramatically. Numerous companies have started investing in different countries and luring customers for their brands. These ever-expanding markets have helped countries to raise capital in terms of foreign domestic investments, thus improving the economy of the country.

Employment Opportunities
One of the most advantageous factors of globalization is that it fosters the generation of employment. This happens due to the emergence of new companies and new markets, where lots of skilled and unskilled labor is required. Immigration between countries also increases, providing better opportunities for people all round the world. By providing employment, globalization helps in increasing the standard of living of the people, and also reduces poverty.

Quality Products
The competition among different companies finds place at an international level. It becomes important for the companies to focus on quality goods and services, in order to have a strong foothold in the market. The consumer is benefited in the process, and gets quality products at cheaper rates. He/she also gets the opportunity to select his goods from a large variety available in the market.

Environmental Protection
Mutual trade carried out by countries has brought about an understanding for the protection of the environment from which they benefit so much. It has been accepted by most countries that action needs to be taken in saving natural resources and wildlife, without thinking about the boundaries that separate them. Global environmental problems like cross-boundary pollution, over-fishing in the oceans, climate change, etc., are solved by discussions and conventions.

Good for Developing Nations
It is claimed that globalization increases the economic prosperity of developing nations. Developed countries invest in such countries with an aim of capturing new markets, which helps them improve their infrastructure and technologies to international levels. A lot of capital is invested in such projects, which in turn proves fruitful to the economy of the developing nation as well.

Equality for All
Globalization has helped in creating international criminal courts, and international justice movements are also launched to provide justice to people at a global level. Disputes are solved through global standards such as patents, copyright laws, and world trade agreements. Thus, it has ensured that people do not get discriminated with regard to country, caste, creed or sex.

Ease of Transportation
With the advent of globalization, there has been an immense increase in the transportation of goods and services worldwide. Things which took weeks for conveyance, can now easily be availed within a couple of days. Due to the development of containerization for ocean shipping, transportation costs are reduced to a great extent, lowering the cost of products in world markets.

Travel and Tourism
Globalization has promoted tourism to great heights. There are many places that have tourism as their main source of capital generation. International trade among different countries also helps in increasing the number of tourists that visit different places around the world.

Unity in Diversity
Globalization has helped in bringing about integrity and social understanding everywhere. The dream for a global village becomes realistic after looking at the impact of globalization. It has helped in removing some barriers that had kept the world divided on various grounds. There has been propagation of democratic ideas among countries. Cross-cultural contacts grow and cultural diffusion takes place, which helps in minimizing differences, and promotes companionship.

External Borrowing
It has often been seen that a poor country is unable to provide adequate financing to its companies, which proves to an obstacle in the development of the country on the whole. With the help of globalization, there is opportunity for corporate, national, and sub-national borrowers to have better access to external finance, with facilities such as external commercial borrowing and syndicated loans.

It is a common belief that globalization plays a role just at international levels of trade and commerce, but the fact is that it has played an important role in making our lives much more comfortable too. The phones, apparels, gadgets or accessories that we use in our day-to-day life are be available to us through globalization. Knowingly or unknowingly, we are all under the impact of globalization, and more importantly it has helped in bringing international peace and justice to mankind.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
13 Universal Ways in Which Globalization Proves to Be Advantageous

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Globalization means increasing the interdependence, connectivity, and integration on a global level, with respect to the social, cultural, political, technological, economic, and ecological levels. It is the collaboration of countries to provide a boost to trade practices, and also to reduce cultural differences.

# data[].attributes.headline
4 Positive Impacts of Globalization on World Economy

# data[].attributes.subject
4 Positive Impacts of Globalization on World Economy

# data[].attributes.body
This article's main purpose is to combat the negative association in the United States with the term globalization. It does this through presenting four simple standpoints that prove globalization is helping the world rather than hurting it. Through globalization, markets worldwide have ultimately become more efficient thanks to enhanced technologies and trade. Competition, an economic positive, is stronger than ever. Since products from other countries are available worldwide, consumers now have more to choose from. An efficient market is what every economy should ultimately strive for. The article then claims that, in a way, globalization helped increase security worldwide. You are less likely to attack an ally if your own country relies on a product only they can give you. Finally, though many Americans may think the opposite, globalization has created a better standard of living worldwide than ever before. Since we live in such a fortunate country, we don't realize that something such as access to clean water is so crucial and rare to someone in a poorer country. Now, people everywhere have a higher standard of living.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's a small world, after all. This saying has never been more true, and if trends continue to develop the way they are, the world may continue to shrink.

In light of advanced technology, higher demands from markets and faster turnaround times, globalization has become a staple for world commerce.

In the U.S., the term globalization often has negative connotations. For many, it represents a threat to their jobs, livelihood and way of life.

Though many Americans think of it as a dirty word, "globalization," actually has been a catalyst for positive change as well.

Related:
K-State promotes globalization by offering Swahili courses

Here are four ways that globalization has had a positive impact on the world economy:
1. More efficient markets
Efficient markets should be what every economy strives for. Essentially, the sign of an efficient market is where there is an equilibrium between what buyers are willing to pay for a good or service and what sellers are willing to sell for a good or service.

If you can improve the way you produce a good or service by doing things such as outsourcing certain processes or buying from an overseas supplier that offers discounts, you can then afford to lower your selling price which results in increased demand and affordability.

Even if businesses don't lower prices, they can make additional profits and then reallocate that excess profit into doing things like increasing wages, taking on more investments or even creating more expansion projects.

Related:
3 negative impacts of globalization on the United States
2. Increased competition
Anytime that you have multiple producers competing for a hold of the economy, that's a good sign for consumers, as the quality of goods and services often goes up as a result.

When businesses started to venture across international borders, what they often did was introduce a new standard into the global marketplace. Consumers then had more options to choose from.

With more competitors to fight over market share, each company has to constantly look to improve their goods or services or create more value for their customers.

This means better products and sometimes lower prices, which is always a good thing for buyers.

When your economy depends largely on another country's economy, it is hard to imagine either one of the countries attacking the other. In a weird sort of way, globalization helped heighten world security.

Although this may seem kind of twisted since there is so much violence that still goes on in the world, the fact remains that globalization has halted many conflicts that could have turned ugly if their country's financial health didn't depend on the other.

4. More wealth equality throughout the world

Although many Americans contend that their standard of living has gone down because of globalization, the flip side to this is that hundreds of thousands of people around the world now have jobs, have started their own businesses and can provide comfort for their families.

Living in the U.S., we take things like clean water, shelter and plentiful food for granted. Our standard of living is so high compared to many nations that when we can no longer buy frivolous luxuries, we claim that we are poor.

Globalization may have stopped you from buying another flat screen TV, but it also helped countless people in developing countries put food on their table for their families.

See? There is a silver lining to it all.

Andy Rao is a junior in finance and accounting. Please send comments to news@kstatecollegian.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
4 positive impacts of globalization on world economy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's a small world, after all. This saying has never been more true, and if trends continue to develop the way they are, the world may continue to shrink.In light of advanced technology, higher demands from markets and faster turnaround times, globalization has become a staple for world commerce.In

# data[].attributes.body
These sources argue that globalization has made the world worse.

# data[].attributes.body
These sources argue that globalization has made the world better.