Approaches to the Study of Globalization

Even after more than two decades of intense scholarly scrutiny, ‘globalization’
has remained a contested and slippery concept. Since the beginning of self conscious
academic inquiries into multiple process of globalization in the early 1990’s, academics
have remained divided on the utility of various methodological approaches. As Fredric
Jameson (1998) astutely points out, there seems to be little utility in forcing such as
complex set of social forces as globalization into a single analytic framework.

Rosenau (2003) defined globalization in terms of what he calls ‘fragmegrative

dynamics’ to ‘under score the contradictions, ambiguities, complexities and
uncertainties that have replaced the regularities of prior epochs’. Academics often
respond to the analytical challenge by trying to take conceptual possession of
globalization as though it were something ‘out there’ to be captured by the correct
analytical framework. Rosow (2000) many researchers approach globalization as if they
were dealing with a process or an object without a meaning of its own prior to its
constitution as a conceptual ‘territory’. Globalization is a little more than ‘globaloney’, to
conflicting interpretations of globalization as economic, political, or cultural processes.

GLOBALIZATION AS ‘GLOBALONEY’

To overcome the globaloney/globalonely hurdle, new forms of narrating economic

content must be developed which focus on the individual — and a healthy dose of
humor to get key points of insight across. After all, unless one has found a way for
people to open their minds, it is futile to “dump stuff” on them. Popular perceptions
today are that the world is shrinking, technology is reducing the barriers to distance, and
national borders are increasingly unimportant. Yet Ghemawat contends that despite the
benefits and ease of technology, human behaviour still matters, distance still matters,
and yes, borders still matter — and these factors overwhelm the perception of a small,
frictionless world. Citing evidence from his primary research on the subject of
globalisation, Ghemawat argued that we are a lot less globalised than many people
perceive. He shared data highlighting the percentage of all telephone calls that are
international (2%), the percentage of all citizens in a given country who are recent
immigrants (3%), the percentage of all foreign direct investment (10%), and finally, the
percentage of all exports relative to GDP (30%). Importantly, Ghemawat argued, most
people overestimate the percentages in each of these categories by a substantial
margin — hence, he refers to globalisation as “globaloney”.

Ghemawat reasons that we are not as connected as many perceive because of the law
of distance — meaning that differences among groups of people determine the ability
and willingness of different groups of people to interact with each other. These
differences can be cultural (e.g., different tastes), geographical (e.g., physical distance
and barriers), administrative (e.g., in the European Union or not in the European Union),
or economic (e.g., differences in affordability and/or living standards). Moreover, these
differences compound and help to explain the limited nature of globalisation today.

GLOBALIZATION AS ECONOMIC PROCESS

Economic globalization is the increasing economic interdependence of

national economies across the world through a rapid increase in cross-border
movement of goods, service, technology, and capital. It also refers to the
increasing interdependence of world economies as a result of the growing scale
of cross-border trade of commodities and services, flow of international capital
and wide and rapid spread of technologies. It may affect economy through
Foreign Direct Investment's impact on economic growth has had a positive
growth effect in wealthy countries and an increase in trade and FDI, resulting in
higher growth rates. ... Furthermore, globalized countries have lower
increases in government outlays and taxes, and lower levels of corruption in their
governments. In the 1980s globalization developed mainly as an economic
process in the form of establishment of the global market. But at that very stage
globalization concurred with the process of ‘perestroika’, and later with the
collapse of the world socialist system including its citadel, the USSR. This fact
may be regarded as a certain manifestation of the political dimension of
globalization since the elimination of bipolarity and relative homogenization of
political world order was one of the conditions of an explosive development of
globalization as an economic process.

GLOBALIZATION AS POLITICAL PROCESS

Traditionally politics has been undertaken within national political systems.

National governments have been ultimately responsible for maintaining the security and
economic welfare of their citizens, as well as the protection of human rights and the
environment within their borders. With global ecological changes, an ever more
integrated global economy, and other global trends, political activity increasingly takes
place at the global level.

Under globalization, politics can take place above the state through political
integration schemes such as the European Union and through intergovernmental
organizations such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World
Trade Organization. Political activity can also transcend national borders through global
movements and NGOs. Civil society organizations act globaly by forming alliances
with organizations in other countries, using global communications systems, and
lobbying international organizations and other actors directly, instead of working through
their national governments. At the same time the early 1990s can be considered a
starting point of globalization as a political process that has already affected the
structure of the world order and that is still producing a profound influence on global
political structure as well as on the political structures of regions and countries. In what
follows I study globalization mainly as a political process, although in my analysis it
would hardly be possible to completely ignore its other aspects.

GLOBALIZATION AS CULTURAL PROCESS

Cultural globalization refers to the transmission of ideas, meanings, and values

around the world in such a way as to extend and intensify social relations.
This process is marked by the common consumption of cultures that have been diffused
by the Internet, popular culture media, and international travel.

Globalization in its primary form started to unfold during the transition from the
industrial to post-industrial society and it was expressed in the development of global
communication systems such as radio and TV. At that period it manifested itself first of
all in socio-cultural and socio-civilizational realms, namely, in the creation of
transnational mass culture – cinema, jazz, rock, and show business – as well as in the
mass counter culture – transnational protest movements primarily aimed against the
existing way of life and socio-cultural environment (in the 1960s and 1970s). However,
even at that time it had certain political consequences when the counter culture would
turn into anti-war movements and there would appear national and international
ecological and human rights organizations which influenced the political sphere and
organization in some leading countries of the world. It is also important to mention that
communication explosion of the 1960s and 1970s (mainly the radio) crossed the border
of the ‘iron curtain’ and in the Western mass culture succeeded to penetrate into the
Soviet bloc which would also bring some political outcomes.