Does Globalisation lead to development? Discuss
“Globalisation” is becoming a buzzword mentioned by increasing number of people. With the improvement of transportation and the emergence of internet, the distance of individuals is becoming closer; moreover, international trade seems to be freer and more frequent. Aninat (2001) defines globalisation as “the increasing interaction among and integration of diverse human societies in all important dimensions of their activities” including economic, environmental and cultural. Considering the different dimensions, economic impacts appear to be the most important. Therefore, the focus here will be on the economic aspect of development. Pro-globalisation campaigners believe that contemporary prosperities are all produced by globalisation; nevertheless, every coin has two sides, globalisation creates both advantages and disadvantages to economic development. However, as a critique of globalisation, this essay will be divided into three parts to prove that globalisation can generate obstacles to economic development. Firstly, China and Singapore are used as examples to verify that globalisation may not be the main cause to national economic development. Secondly, globalisation could expand the gap between the rich and the poor. Finally, three disadvantages have emerged with the pace of globalisation.
It is argued by pro-globalisation campaigners that the speed of development is increased by trade liberalization; moreover, globalisation contributes to the reduction of poverty rate (Bardhan, 2007, p3849). Furthermore, it is claimed that globalisation leads to tourism improvement which motivates the national economic development (Sugiyarto et al, 2003). Since the tidal wave of globalisation has swept across the whole world, China and Singapore might be two typical examples of economic success. However, it is seemed that globalisation is not the main cause to economic prosperities. It is stated that it was the significant effect of agriculture and land reform that decreased the poverty, which defined by World Bank as the income less than $1 a day per capita, in China not the impact generated by globalisation (Bardhan, 2007, p3850). The poverty line in China shows a distinct drop from 63.8 percent to 9.9 percent during the year between 1981 and 1987 (Ravallion and Chen, 2007, cited by Bardhan, 2007, p3849). Based on the datum from World Bank, the notable reduction of poverty in China had already occurred before 1990, which is commonly recognized as the start of the modern globalisation. Indeed, the figure calculated by the World Bank shows that the poverty rate in 1987 is nearly 33 percent of which in 1981. In other words, two-thirds of the poor in China overstepped the poverty line during 7 years (Bardhan, 2007, p3849). Most of the poor were in the rural regions; moreover, it was the agriculture policies, such as land reform and the readjustment of primary products procurement values, that increased the income of poor farmers. Therefore, the poverty rate reduced and national economy developed (Bardhan, 2007, p3849).
Similarly, it is argued that although Singapore seems to be one of the winners of globalisation; however, its economic development is not due to free market (Linda 1983, p753). The GNP (gross national product) and real GDP (gross domestic product) launched during two decades between 1960 and 1980. For example, GNP development increased from 10 percent in 1960 to 14.3 percent in 1970. Moreover, real GDP growth rate rose from 8.7 percent to 9.4 percent in these twenty years (Linda, 1983, p753). Based on military services from Great Britain and port commerce, Singapore started to export diversiform industries, including transportation, manufacturing and finance services; consequently, it acted as a quite important role in these industries which stimulated the national economic development (Linda, 1983, p753). Additionally, the target of full employment was achieved in...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document