Globalization refers to the increasing unification of the world's economic order through reduction of such barriers to international trade

as tariffs, export fees, and import quotas. The goal is to increase material wealth, goods, and services through an international division of labor by efficiencies catalyzed by international relations, specialization and competition. It describes the process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through communication, transportation, and trade. The term is most closely associated with the term economic globalization: the integration of national economies into the international economy [1] through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, the spread of technology, and military presence. However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological [2] factors. The term can also refer to the transnational circulation of ideas, languages, or popular culture through acculturation. An aspect of the world which has gone through the process can be said to be globalized. Against this view, an alternative approach stresses how globalization has actually decreased inter-cultural contacts while increasing the possibility of international and intra[3] national conflict. Covering a wide range of distinct political, economic, and cultural trends, the term globalization has quickly become one of the most fashionable buzzwords of contemporary political and academic debate. In popular discourse, globalization often functions as little more than a synonym for one or more of the following phenomena: the pursuit of classical liberal (or free market) policies in the world economy (economic liberalization), the growing dominance of western (or even American) forms of political, economic, and cultural life (westernization or Americanization), the proliferation of new information technologies (the Internet Revolution), as well as the notion that humanity stands at the threshold of realizing one single unified community in which major sources of social conflict have vanished (global integration). Fortunately, recent social theory has formulated a more precise concept of globalization than those typically offered by pundits. Although sharp differences continue to separate participants in the ongoing debate, most contemporary social theorists endorse the view that globalization refers to fundamental changes in the spatial and temporal contours of social existence, according to which the significance of space or territory undergoes shifts in the face of a no less dramatic acceleration in the temporal structure of crucial forms of human activity. Geographical distance is typically measured in time. As the time necessary to connect distinct geographical locations is reduced, distance or space undergoes compression or annihilation. The human experience of space is intimately connected to the temporal structure of those activities by means of which we experience space. Changes in the temporality of human activity inevitably generate altered experiences of space or territory. Theorists of globalization disagree about the precise sources of recent shifts in the spatial and temporal contours of human life. Nonetheless, they generally agree that alterations in humanity's experiences of space and time are working to undermine the importance of local and even national boundaries in many arenas of human endeavor. Since globalization contains far-reaching implications for virtually every facet of human life, it necessarily suggests the need to rethink key questions of normative political theory. Economic globalization can be measured in different ways. These center around the four main economic flows that characterize globalization: Goods and services, e.g., exports plus imports as a proportion of national income or per capita of population Labor/people, e.g., net migration rates; inward or outward migration flows, weighted by population Capital, e.g., inward or outward direct investment as a proportion of national income or per head of population Technology, e.g., international research & development flows; proportion of populations (and rates of change thereof) using particular inventions (especially 'factor-neutral' technological advances such as the telephone, motorcar, broadband) As globalization is not only an economic phenomenon, a multivariate approach to measuring globalization is the recent index calculated by the Swiss think tank KOF. The index measures the three main dimensions of globalization: economic, social, and political. In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, an overall index of globalization and sub-indices referring to actual economic flows, economic restrictions, data on personal contact, data on information flows, and data on cultural proximity is calculated. Data is available on a yearly basis for 122 countries, as detailed in Dreher, Gaston and Martens [31] (2008). According to the index, the world's most globalized country is Belgium, followed by Austria, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The least globalized countries according to the KOF-index are Haiti, Myanmar, the Central African [32] Republic and Burundi. A.T. Kearney and Foreign Policy Magazine jointly publish another Globalization Index. According to the 2006 index, Singapore, Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Denmark are the most globalized, while Indonesia, India and Iran are the least globalized among countries listed. Effects Globalization has various aspects which affect the world in several different ways [edit]Industrial Emergence of worldwide production markets and broader access to a range of foreign products for consumers and companies, particularly movement of material and goods between and within national boundaries. International trade in manufactured goods [33] has increased more than 100 times (from $95 billion to $12 trillion) since 1955. China's trade with Africa rose sevenfold during [34][35] Superscript text 200007 alone. Bold text [edit]Financial Emergence of worldwide financial markets and better access to external financing for borrowers. By the early part of the 21st [36] century more than $1.5 trillion in national currencies were traded daily to support the expanded levels of trade and investment. Economic [40] Realization of a global common market, based on the freedom of exchange of goods and capital. Further, in the job market, employees compete indirectly in a global job market. In the past, the economic fate of workers was tied to the fate of national economies. With the advent of the information age and improvements in communication, this is no longer the case. Because workers compete in a global market, wages are less dependent on the success or failure of individual economies. This [43] has had a major effect on wages and income distribution. Survival in the new global business market calls for improved productivity and increased competition. Due to the market becoming worldwide, companies in various industries have to upgrade their products and use technology skilfully in order to face increased [44] competition. [edit]Political The development of globalization has wide-ranging impacts on political developments, which particularly go along with the decrease of the importance of the state. Through the creation of sub-state and supra-state institutions such as the EU, the WTO, the G8 or

the International Criminal Court, the state loses power of policy making and thus sovereignty. However, many see the relative decline in US power as being based in globalization, particularly due to its high trade imbalance. The consequence of this is a global power shift towards Asian states, particularly China, that has seen tremendous growth rates. In fact, current estimates claim that [46] China's economy will overtake that of the United States by 2025. [edit]Informational Increase in information flows between geographically remote locations. Arguably this is a technological change with the advent of fibre optic communications, satellites, and increased availability of telephone and Internet. [edit]Language The most spoken first language is Mandarin (845 million speakers) followed by Spanish (329 million speakers) and English [47] (328 million speakers). However the most popular second language is undoubtedly English, the "lingua franca" of globalization: About 35% of the world's mail, telexes, and cables are in English. Approximately 40% of the world's radio programs are in English. [48] English is the dominant language on the Internet. Global market [edit]Expansion A flood of consumer goods such as televisions, radios, bicycles, and textiles into the United States, Europe, and Japan has helped fuel [112] the economic expansion of Asian tiger economies in recent decades. However, Chinese textile and clothing exports have [when?] recently encountered criticism from Europe. This criticism has been settling after Beijing and Brussels reached a compromise. Still in 2004, EU China sold textiles worth about 514 million euros, while the value of Chinese apparel exports to the EU amounted to 16 billion euros and these mighty exports from China results job losses. In France, ceased to exist about 7 thousand. Positions in [113] [114][115] Spain 70 thousand, about 200 thousand in Italy. the United States and some African countries. As of 26 April 2005 Asia Times article notes that, "In regional giant South Africa, some 300,000 textile workers have lost their jobs in the past two years due [116] to the influx of Chinese goods". The increasing U.S. trade deficit with China has cost 2.4 million American jobs between 2001 and [117] 2008, according to a study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). From 2000 to 2007, the United States had lost a total of [118] 3.2 million manufacturing jobs. A report issued in 2007 by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP predicted that by 2050 the economies of the E7 emerging economies (the BRIC countries: China, India, Brazil, and Russia, plus Mexico, Indonesia and Turkey) will be around 50% larger than the current G7 (US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Canada). China is expected to overtake the US as the largest economy around [119] 2025, while India will overtake the US in 2050. A more recent report issued by Goldman Sachs that was compiled after China released their GDP growth figures for 2009 predicted that China is about to overtake Japan and may become the world's largest [120] economy by 2020. (See the entry on BRIC for more details) [edit]Financial interdependency The world today is so interconnected that the collapse of the subprime mortgage market in the U.S. led to a global financial [121] crisis and recession on a scale not seen since the Great Depression. According to critics, government deregulation and failed [122][123] regulation of Wall Street's investment banks were important contributors to the subprime mortgage crisis. [edit]Drug and illicit goods trade The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) issued a report that the global drug trade generates more than $320 billion [124] a year in revenues. Worldwide, the UN estimates there are more than 50 million regular users of heroin, cocaine and synthetic [125] [126] drugs. The international trade of endangered species is second only to drug trafficking. Traditional Chinese medicine often incorporates ingredients from all parts of plants, the leaf, stem, flower, root, and also ingredients from animals and minerals. The use of parts of endangered species (such as seahorses, rhinoceroshorns, saiga antelope horns, and tiger bones and claws) has [127][128] created controversy and resulted in a black market of poachers who hunt restricted animals. Advocates 1) Neo-Liberalism The majority of books, newspaper articles and press releases in this frame represent the neo-liberal view of globalization. Supporters of free trade claim that it increases economic prosperity as well as opportunity, especially among developing nations, enhances civil liberties and leads to a more efficient allocation of resources. Economic theories of comparative advantage suggest that free trade leads to a more efficient allocation of resources, with all countries involved in the trade benefiting. In general, this leads to lower [153][154] prices, more employment, higher output and a higher standard of living for those in developing countries. Proponents of laissez-faire capitalism, and some libertarians, say that higher degrees of political and economic freedom in the form of perceived democracy and capitalism in the developed world are ends in themselves and also produce higher levels of material [153] wealth. They see globalization as the beneficial spread of liberty and capitalism. Supporters of democratic globalization are sometimes called pro-globalists. They believe that the first phase of globalization, which was market-oriented, should be followed by a phase of building global political institutions representing the will of world citizens. 2) Global Village [155] An optimistic view of globalism is suggested by Marshall McLuhan's of the Global Village This view suggests that globalization will lead to a world where people from all countries will become more integrated and aware of common interests and shared [156] humanity. 3) Importance of international cooperation A third body of literature points out the value of international cooperation in solving problems of mutual concern ranging from human-rights issues to environmental concerns such as global warming. This view is similar to that represented by the constructive frame. 4) World government Dr. Francesco Stipo, Director of the United States Association of the Club of Rome, writes in favor of political globalization in the form of a world government, suggests that it "should reflect the political and economic balances of world nations. A world confederation would not supersede the authority of the State governments but rather complement it, as both the States and the [157] world authority would have power within their sphere of competence". Some, such as former Canadian Senator Douglas Roche, O.C., simply view globalization as inevitable and advocate creating institutions such as a directly elected United Nations Parliamentary Assembly to exercise oversight over unelected international bodies.

[45]

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, commonly abbreviated ASEAN ( /si.n/ AH-see-ahn, rarely /zi.n/ AH-zee[6][7] ahn), is ageo-political and economic organization of ten countries located in Southeast Asia, which was formed on 8 August 1967 [8] by Indonesia, Malaysia, thePhilippines, Singapore and Thailand. Since then, membership has expanded to include Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. Its aims include the acceleration of economic growth, social progress, cultural development among its members, the protection of regional peace and stability, and to provide opportunities for member countries [9] to discuss differences peacefully. ASEAN covers an area of 4.46 million km, 3% of the total land area of Earth, with a population of approximately 600 million people, [10] 8.8% of the world population. In 2010, its combined nominal GDP had grown to US$1.8 trillion. If ASEAN was a single entity, it would rank as the ninth largest economy in the world. Policies Apart from consultations and consensus, ASEANs agenda-setting and decision-making processes can be usefully understood in terms of the so-called Track I and Track II. Track I refers to the practice of diplomacy among government channels. The participants stand as representatives of their respective states and reflect the official positions of their governments during negotiations and [44] discussions. All official decisions are made in Track I. Therefore, "Track I refers to intergovernmental processes". Track II differs [45] slightly from Track I, involving civil society groups and other individuals with various links who work alongside governments. This track enables governments to discuss controversial issues and test new ideas without making official statements or binding commitments, and, if necessary, backtrack on positions. Although Track II dialogues are sometimes cited as examples of the involvement of civil society in regional decision-making process by governments and other second track actors, NGOs have rarely got access to this track, meanwhile participants from the academic community are a dozen think-tanks. However, these think-tanks are, in most cases, very much linked to their respective governments, and dependent on government funding for their academic and policy-relevant activities, and many working in Track II [44] have previous bureaucratic experience. Their recommendations, especially in economic integration, are often closer to ASEANs decisions than the rest of civil societys positions. The track that acts as a forum for civil society in Southeast Asia is called Track III. Track III participants are generally civil society [46] groups who represent a particular idea or brand. Track III networksclaim to represent communities and people who are largely marginalised from political power centres and unable to achieve positive change without outside assistance. This track tries to influence government policies indirectly by lobbying, generating pressure through the media. Third-track actors also organise and/or attend meetings as well as conferences to get access to Track I officials. While Track II meetings and interactions with Track I actors have increased and intensified, rarely has the rest of civil society had the opportunity to interface with Track II. Those with Track I have been even rarer. Looking at the three tracks, it is clear that until now, ASEAN has been run by government officials who, as far as ASEAN matters are concerned, are accountable only to their governments and not the people. In a lecture on the occasion of ASEANs 38th anniversary, the incumbent Indonesian President Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono admitted: All the decisions about treaties and free trade areas, about declarations and plans of action, are made by Heads of Government, ministers and senior officials. And the fact that among the masses, there is little knowledge, let alone appreciation, of the large [47] initiatives that ASEAN is taking on their behalf. The organisation holds meetings, known as the ASEAN Summit, where heads of government of each member meet to discuss and resolve regional issues, as well as to conduct other meetings with other countries outside of the bloc with the intention of promoting external relations. The ASEAN Leaders' Formal Summit was first held in Bali, Indonesia in 1976. Its third meeting was held in Manila in 1987 and during [48] this meeting, it was decided that the leaders would meet every five years. Consequently, the fourth meeting was held in [48] Singapore in 1992 where the leaders again agreed to meet more frequently, deciding to hold the summit every three years. In 2001, it was decided to meet annually to address urgent issues affecting the region. Member nations were assigned to be the summit host in alphabetical order except in the case of Burma which dropped its 2006 hosting rights in 2004 due to pressure from [49] the United States and the European Union. By December 2008, the ASEAN Charter came into force and with it, the ASEAN Summit will be held twice in a year. The formal summit meets for three days. The usual itinerary is as follows: Leaders of member states would hold an internal organisation meeting. Leaders of member states would hold a conference together with foreign ministers of the ASEAN Regional Forum. A meeting, known as ASEAN Plus Three, is set for leaders of three Dialogue Partners (People's Republic of China, Japan, South Korea) A separate meeting, known as ASEAN-CER, is set for another set of leaders of two Dialogue Partners (Australia, New Zealand). ASEAN was preceded by an organisation called the Association of Southeast Asia, commonly called ASA, an alliance consisting of the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand that was formed in 1961. The bloc itself, however, was established on 8 August 1967, when foreign ministers of five countries Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand met at the Thai Department of Foreign Affairs building in Bangkok and signed the ASEAN Declaration, more commonly known as the Bangkok Declaration. The five foreign ministers Adam Malik of Indonesia, Narciso Ramos of the Philippines, Abdul Razak of Malaysia, S. Rajaratnam of Singapore, and Thanat Khoman of Thailand are considered the organisation's [11] Founding Fathers. The motivations for the birth of ASEAN were so that its members governing elite could concentrate on nation building, the common fear of communism, reduced faith in or mistrust of external powers in the 1960s, and a desire for economic development; not to mention Indonesias ambition to become a regional hegemon through regional cooperation and the hope on the part of Malaysia and Singapore to constrain Indonesia and bring it into a more cooperative framework. [12] In 1976, the Melanesian state of Papua New Guinea was accorded observer status. Throughout the 1970s, the organisation embarked on a program of economic cooperation, following the Bali Summit of 1976. This floundered in the mid-1980s and was only revived around 1991 due to a Thai proposal for a regional free trade area. The bloc grew when Brunei Darussalam became the sixth member on 8 January 1984, barely a week after gaining independence on 1 [13] January. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is a forum for 21 Pacific Rim countries (styled "member economies") that seeks to promote free trade and economic cooperation throughout the Asia-Pacific region. Established in 1989 in response to the

[4]

[5]

growing interdependence of Asia-Pacific economies and the advent of regional economic blocs (such as the European Union) in other parts of the world, APEC works to raise living standards and education levels through sustainable economic growth and to foster a sense of community and an appreciation of shared interests among Asia-Pacific countries. Members account for approximately 40% of the world's population, approximately 54% of the world's gross domestic product and [1] about 44% of world trade. An annual APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting is attended by the heads of government of all APEC members except the Republic of China (Taiwan), which is represented under the name Chinese Taipei by a ministerial-level official. The location of the meeting rotates annually among the member economies, and a famous tradition involves the attending leaders dressing in a national costume of the host member. APEC's Three Pillars

To meet the Bogor Goals, APEC carries out work in three main areas: 1. Trade and Investment Liberalisation 2. Business Facilitation 3. Economic and Technical Cooperation In January 1989, Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke called for more effective economic cooperation across the Pacific Rim region. This led to the first meeting of APEC in the Australian capital ofCanberra in November, chaired by Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Gareth Evans. Attended by political ministers from twelve countries, the meeting concluded with commitments for future annual meetings in Singapore and South Korea. Countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) opposed the initial proposal, instead proposing the East Asia Economic Caucus which would exclude non-Asian countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. This plan was opposed and strongly criticized by Japan and the United States. The first APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting occurred in 1993 when U.S. President Bill Clinton, after discussions with Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, invited the heads of government from member economies to a summit on Blake Island. He believed it would help bring the stalled Uruguay Round of trade talks back on track. At the meeting, some leaders called for continued reduction of barriers to trade and investment, envisioning a community in the Asia-Pacific region that might promote prosperity through cooperation. The APEC Secretariat, based in Singapore, was established to coordinate the activities of the organization. During the meeting in 1994 in Bogor, Indonesia, APEC leaders adopted the Bogor Goals that aim for free and open trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific by 2010 for industrialized economies and by 2020 for developing economies. In 1995, APEC established a business advisory body named the APEC Business Advisory Council (ABAC), composed of three business executives from each member of economy. APEC has been criticized for failing to clearly define itself or serve a useful purpose. According to the organization, it is "the premier forum for facilitating economic growth, cooperation, trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region" established to "further [39] enhance economic growth and prosperity for the region and to strengthen the Asia-Pacific community." However, whether it has [40] accomplished anything constructive remains debatable. APEC currently has 21 members, including most countries with a coastline on the Pacific Ocean. However, the criterion for membership is that the member is a separate economy, rather than a state. As a result, APEC uses the term member economies rather than member countries to refer to its members. One result of this criterion is that membership of the forum includes Taiwan (participating under the name "Chinese Taipei") alongside the People's Republic of China (see Cross-Strait relations), as well as Hong Kong, which is now a Special Administrative Region of China. APEC is considering the prospects and options for a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) which would include all member economies of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Since 2006, the APEC Business Advisory Council, promoting the theory that a free trade area has the best chance of converging the member nations and ensuring stable economic growth under free trade, has lobbied for the creation of a high-level task force to study and develop a plan for a free trade area. The proposal for a FTAAP arose due to the lack of progress in the Doha round of World Trade Organization negotiations, and as a way to overcome the 'spaghetti bowl' effect created by overlapping and conflicting elements of free trade agreements between members there are as many as 60 [17][17][18] [19][19] free trade agreements and 117 being negotiated in Southeast Asia and the Asia-Pacific region. The FTAAP is more ambitious in scope than the Doha round, which limits itself to reducing trade restrictions. The FTAAP would create a free trade zone [17][19] that would considerably expand commerce and economic growth in the region. The economic expansion and growth in trade could exceed the expectations of other regional free trade areas such as the ASEAN Plus Three (ASEAN + China, Japan, and South [20] Korea). Some criticisms include that the diversion of trade within APEC members would create trade imbalances, market conflicts [19] and complications with nations of other regions. The development of the FTAAP is expected to take many years, involving [17] essential studies, evaluations and negotiations between member economies. It is also affected by the absence of political will and [17] popular agitations and lobbying against free trade in domestic politics. India has requested membership in APEC, and received initial support from the United States, Japan and Australia. Officials have [6][7] decided not to allow India to join for various reasons. However, the decision was made not to admit more members until 2010. Moreover, India does not border the Pacific Ocean, which all current members do. The Philippines' trade negotiator was quoted as saying that there is concern that "Once the Indians come in, the (Asian) weighting would become heavier in this part of the [8] [9] world." However, India has been invited to be an observer for the first time in November 2011. In addition to India, Mongolia, Pakistan, Laos, Bangladesh, Costa Rica, Colombia, Panama and Ecuador, are among a dozen countries seeking membership in APEC by 2008. Colombia applied for APEC's membership as early as in 1995, but its bid was [13] halted as the organization stopped accepting new members from 1993 to 1996, and the moratorium was further prolonged to [citation 2007 due to the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. Costa Rica, Colombia and Ecuador hope to become members in 2010. needed] Guam has also been actively seeking a separate membership, citing the example of Hong Kong, but the request is opposed by the United States, which currently represents Guam.
[10] [10][11] [10] [12] [5]