The Emergence of Globalization
Discuss about the Impact of globalization on the sovereignty of state.
The current era of globalization has transformed the business scenario as well as the sovereignty of the state and economy. (Li and Zhou, 2015) pointed out that the current era of globalization has the significant impact on the geographical distances that are disappearing. On the other hand, the territorial boundaries are no longer an obstruction, which is quite beneficial for the import and exports of the services, capitals, and goods. The study is specifically focusing on the fact that the emergence of the globalization has transformed the state sovereignty and economy. It mainly focuses on the transformed scenario of the state and economy sovereignty due to the effects of globalised world. The study would provide the justification of this thesis statement by analyzing the underlying theories sourced from relevant articles. The argumentative analysis would be helpful here in describing the thesis in a more clarified manner.
The article follows the idea of the negative impacts of globalization visible when British referendum was announced and Brexit was introduced with the departure of European Union from UK. The major shockwaves were found in the financial market. Many people perceived this referendum as irrational, but the result intensified the separation attempts. Some of the potential nominees of the presidential election including Donald Trump used the platform of the anti-globalization for their electoral campaigns. Such unavoidable sentiments of the American voters eventually led to make adjustments in the existing policies that address the issues with globalization. The emergence of the globalization affected the state sovereignty and global economy as well. In fact, the issues arose in the free trade agreements as well. The articles describe the change relationships in internationalized business. It has been observed that free trade agreement, which is the boon to develop economy structure, is highly affected by the current developments in this globalised world. The further study would develop the considerable understanding regarding the emerging contemporary issues in the globalised world in the context of state sovereignty and economic development.
Prior to globalization, people used to live in a world where the sovereignty was unchallenged and it remained so for many generations. However, under the combined onslaught of internet, monetary unions, governmental and non-governmental organisations, and global televisions; the idea of the independent and autonomous entities is collapsing much considerably. Wachtel (2017) implied that due to such transformation, the sovereignty is nearly diminished. However, opposing such statement, Mol (2016) exclaimed that sovereignty is still accepted as the basis of state interaction. It has been observed that some of the weaker states where the outside actors influence the domestic structures; the sovereignty is still much attractive. Agnew (2015) defined that globalization is the multifaceted phenomenon that creates impacts socially, politically, geographically, and culturally.
The globalization effects have its significance in state sovereignty as well as the business organisations. One of the most highlighted theories of post globalised period is protectionism, which is the economic policy that is restricting the import business thorough controlling the tariff rates. It includes the restrictions in the import quotas and different types of the government regulations. Therefore, it affected the foreign trade investment as the exporters require complying with some of the strict rules. This protectionism theory is applied to protect the country from the external forces in the business ground. Even though the protectionism reduced the risk probability in the trading business by limiting the import services, it eliminated the chances for globalization. Hence, the sovereignty was against the globalization process. For example, Donald Trump restricted such trade tariffs to limit the trades with outside countries. This theory clearly suggests the thesis in this study by developing the understanding the reverse effects of globalization on state sovereignty.
Negative Impacts of Globalization
The economic globalization usually involves the distribution, production, trade, and finance management. During 1960’s and 1970’s, American MNCs increased the Foreign Direct Investments (FDI). Apparently, such fruitful effects of the globalization contributed to the development of the global economy. Moreover, it was also noticed that the advancements in the political, technological, and state sovereignty helped the business marketers to adopt innovative approaches for the overseas expansion (James 2017). The current development in the financial market has transformed the national capitals into international financial capitals by managing the integrated business process. In addition to this, it is also noticed that the characters of the production, commodities, and business markets have shifted to a global perspective. Accordingly, the control over the states is drastically changed (Stiglitz 2017). In spite of the current advancements brought to the world by the effects of globalization, the negative consequences are also highlighted much significantly. The anti-globalization campaigns adopted by some of the nominees of presidential election including Donald Trump are one of the major examples of such negative influence (Liang, Ren and Sun 2015).
Both globalization and liberalization are the parts of economical and programming reformation that has been undertaken by many of the countries. According to Essletzbichler, Disslbacher and Moser (2018), the earlier generations had the little knowledge about the sovereignty due to the limited impacts. However, the emergence of globalization has created the significant effects to transform the states into associations. It is notified that globalization has the considerable effects on the sovereignty of the nation-state. The normative framework developed for the human rights has entrenched many obligations on the part of state towards the citizens since 1945. The current transformation in the social contract has now created the strong welfare element to this scenario. On the contrary, Jedinger and Schoen (2017) argued that due to such economic integration, the range of available policy options to the states have become much limited. Moreover, this integration has diminished the ability of meeting these obligations.
The protectionism theory has the reverse effects on the state economy due to which some of the counter arguments are also presented. O’Rourke (2016) argued that the emergence of the protectionism is much ineffective and more costly for the foreign direct investors. Moreover, the country applying such tariff regulations in the trade businesses was troublesome for sustaining jobs. In fact, these restrictions affected the domestic growth as well. It is also noticed that the import tariff pushed up the prices for the potential consumers and cut off the domestic market from the genuine competition. Claessens and Van Horen (2015) commented that this protectionism method has the insignificant effects on the resource allocations for the long run. Therefore, it can be implied that theory of protectionism has the reverse effects in the globalised ear. In one word, it opposes the globalization concepts in a clarified manner.
The disappearance of the nation-state due to the globalization effects created many counter arguments as well. It has been observed that the globalised economy is not beneficial in every aspect. For instance, Brexit has affected the current Free Trade Agreements and the Foreign Direct Investments. Archer and Lonsdale (2017) argued that the current globalised economy is not new to the history. On the other hand, the territorial boundaries are no longer an obstruction, which is quite beneficial for the import and exports of the services, capitals, and goods. It is evident that the economic structure was more open and flexibility during 1870-1914 than current time (Frenk, Gómez-Dantés and Moon 2014). The appearance of the transnational cooperation is comparatively rare. Moreover, it is noticed that due to the exaggeration of the capital mobility, the advanced industrial countries are concentrating more on the Foreign Direct Investments. The economic powers can build more capacity if these coordinate with the policies. Webster (2015) highlighted that globalization is unable to replace the internationalization process of the global economy. Moreover, it has been observed that there are multiplicity types and levels of the governance. Global economy and internationalized economy is completely different to each other. For example, the global economy determines the futile national policies whereas the national policies are highly visible in the internationalized economy (Baylis, Smith and Owens 2017). Internationalized economy is generally led by the internationalized regulations due to which it does not require any national policy to create sovereignty. Nation state still has the considerable role to perform among the governing powers.
The Effects of Globalization on State Sovereignty and Economy
The evidence derived from the real life scenario provides the insights about the impacts of the globalization on the state sovereignty and economy. The supports and the arguments present in this discussion are used for presenting the complete evaluation (Laborde and Ronzoni 2016). It is claimed that the changes in the sovereignty power in the state and the economical field are fueled by the advanced technologies and changed policies in a globalized scenario (Fukuyama 2016). The exiting national policies have the power to maintain similar sovereignty by improving the understanding regarding the foreign trades and internationalized business. However, it is quite important to understand that the advancements brought to the current scenario much influenced by the innovative techniques and forms (Cutler 2016). Moreover, the business marketers, policy makers, and the citizens are changing their attributes by keeping pace with the modernized world. Therefore, the impacts of the globalization cannot be denied. The news article defines that the concerns regarding immigration are dominating the Brexit referendum. Donald Trump started developing the rhetoric of protectionism in United States after he was elected in the presidential election. The US presidential election fueled the protest against the globalization and free trade. Donald Trump criticized the free trade business with China as he perceived it as the exploitation of US economy (Asiaone.com 2016). Moreover, he even stated that he would impose the massive tariff rates, especially on the Chinese goods. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton was continuously questioned for supporting the benefits of globalization and international trades due to which she faced the considerable challenges from the political parties (Bbc.com 2016).
However, the arguments related to the eventual declines on US manufacturing had pointed out the electoral cycle as one of the major reasons. It is perceived that majority of the benefits derived from globalization is visible within the small groups of a country. In fact, it is also noticeable that some specific adjustments made in the national policies would be much beneficial for the economic growth. The international organisations influence the global market in many recognizable ways. For instance, the emerging threats of global terrorism and the challenges of the climate change are much recognizable in this current era of globalization (Staeheli 2016). The negative impact of the financial crisis on the national economic policy has changed the autonomous nature of state sovereignty as a form of capitalism. It has been observed that some of the weaker states where the outside actors influence the domestic structures; the sovereignty is still much attractive. In a country or state where the leaders have very little control over the different activities or the trans-border movement; still depends on the sovereignty (Haynes et al. 2017). Therefore, it can be stated that the effects of the globalization is quite significant in such regards.
Especially, the movements undertaken by Donald Trump against the globalization have transformed the perception regarding the trade relationships with the foreign countries. The international organisations influence the global market in many recognizable ways. For instance, the emerging threats of global terrorism and the challenges of the climate change are much recognizable in this current era of globalization (Lyubashits, Mordovtsev and Mamychev 2015). The normative framework developed for the human rights has entrenched many obligations on the part of state towards the citizens since 1945. The current transformation in the social contract has now created the strong welfare element to this scenario. In spite of the oppositions from the elected presidents, the globalised business practices have continued contributing to the global economy and sovereignty of the states.
Protectionism: The Economic Policy that is Restricting the Import Business
Conclusion
The study develops the understanding about the impacts of globalization on state sovereignty and economy. The study presents the supportive statement for the selected thesis, which concentrates on the potential changes visible in the post globalization era. The arguments arose when British referendum was announced and Brexit was introduced with the departure of European Union from UK. It has been observed that the current development in the financial market has transformed the national capitals into international financial capitals by managing the integrated business process. In addition to this, it is also noticed that the characters of the production, commodities, and business markets have shifted to a global perspective. The international organisations influence the global market in many recognizable ways. For instance, the emerging threats of global terrorism and the challenges of the climate change are much recognizable in this current era of globalization. However, the anti-globalization leaders impose more challenges in developing sovereignty of the states by increasing FDI rates and discouraging free trade agreements.
References
Agnew, J., 2015. Revisiting the territorial trap. Nordia Geographical Publications, 44(4), pp.43-48.
Altbach, P.G. and De Wit, H., 2017. The new nationalism and internationalization of HE. University World News, 474.
Archer, J.C. and Lonsdale, R.E., 2017. 4 Great Plains settlement: Globalization and deregulation. Revival: Globalization and Marginality in Geographical Space (2001): Political, Economic and Social Issues of Development at the Dawn of New Millennium, p.37.
Asiaone.com, 2016. Next to exit: Globalisation?. [online] AsiaOne. Available at: <https://www.asiaone.com/world/next-exit-globalisation> [Accessed 14 Mar. 2018].
Baylis, J., Smith, S. and Owens, P. eds., 2017. The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations. Oxford University Press.
Bbc.com, 2016. Why is globalisation under attack?. [online] BBC News. Available at: <https://www.bbc.com/news/business-37554634> [Accessed 14 Mar. 2018].
Claessens, S. and Van Horen, N., 2015. The impact of the global financial crisis on banking globalization. IMF Economic Review, 63(4), pp.868-918.
Cutler, A.C., 2016. 12 Historical materialism, globalization, and law. Historical Materialism and Globalisation: Essays on Continuity and Change, p.69.
Essletzbichler, J., Disslbacher, F. and Moser, M., 2018. The victims of neoliberal globalisation and the rise of the populist vote: a comparative analysis of three recent electoral decisions. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 11(1), pp.73-94.
Frenk, J., Gómez-Dantés, O. and Moon, S., 2014. From sovereignty to solidarity: a renewed concept of global health for an era of complex interdependence. The Lancet, 383(9911), pp.94-97.
Fukuyama, F., 2016. US against the world? Trump’s America and the new global order. Financial times, 11.
Haynes, J., Hough, P., Malik, S. and Pettiford, L., 2017. World Politics: International Relations and Globalisation in the 21st Century. Sage.
James, D., 2017. Trump”s pro-globalisation critics miss the key questions. Eureka Street, 27(2), p.18.
Jedinger, A. and Schoen, A., 2017. Anti-Americanism and Public Attitudes toward Transatlantic Trade. German Politics, pp.1-22.
Laborde, C. and Ronzoni, M., 2016. What is a free state? Republican internationalism and globalisation.
Li, G. and Zhou, H., 2015. Globalization of financial capitalism and its impact on financial sovereignty. World Review of Political Economy, 6(2), pp.176-191.
Liang, H., Ren, B. and Sun, S.L., 2015. An anatomy of state control in the globalization of state-owned enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(2), pp.223-240.
Lyubashits, V.Y., Mordovtsev, A.Y. and Mamychev, A.Y., 2015. State and algorithms of globalization. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3 S6), p.277.
Mol, A.P., 2016. The environmental nation state in decline. Environmental Politics, 25(1), pp.48-68.
O’Rourke, K., 2016. The lesson from Brexit is that too much market and too little state invites a backlash. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog.
Pettifor, A., 2017. Causes and consequences of President Donald Trump. real-world economics review, p.44.
Staeheli, L.A., 2016, February. Globalization and the scales of citizenship. In Geography Research Forum (Vol. 19, pp. 60-77).
Stiglitz, J.E., 2017. The overselling of globalization. Business Economics, 52(3), pp.129-137.
Wachtel, H., 2017. World trade order and the beginning of the decline of the Washington consensus. Challenges Of Globalization: New Trends In International Politics And Society, p.173.
Webster, E., 2015. Labour after Globalisation: Old and New Sources of Power. Labour and transnational action in times of crisis, pp.115-27.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
