There are several changes in the society from time immemorial. As a result, many nations have improved their economic and social administrations to greater heights. This advancement changes a country’s technology, military, and economy. In definition, globalization is a broader term that covers not only the economical sector but also the social administration of nations. Globalization is the combination and exchange of cultural and economical ideologies. This exchange brings various features like harmony between nations, developing the economy, and creating a new world that connects. This connection is a result of global network systems that ease communication, transport of labor and goods, and enhance the growth of trade. Therefore, globalization does not only have positive effects on economy, social and cultural fabrics but also there are negative effects which need to be discussed.
Globalization is made up of several important elements. These elements are broken into three areas, namely, economic, culture and individual. Strictness in the management of how capital flows, has been in the recent past led to supremacy of international traders. This flow is well managed by commerce related financial markets and broad-based corporations around the globe. They have an upper hand from various intercontinental organizations like the international Monetary Fund and the World Bank (Dollahite, 2005). Hence, there is monopoly, control of gross domestic product, and capital sharing through Commerce. Culturally, it has been critically referred to as a tool that assimilates the national expressive ideas adopted by firms like McDonalds. Individually, globalization endorses customer values that have taste and preference.
From the above brief definition of globalization there is a two sided feature of it. That is, it has the importance of being positive and negative on politics, economy, culture, and social aspects. Here are some of the negative implications of globalization. The United States has a large control of food processing and dispatch systems due to its efficient economic status. France has a low profile on this junk food culture, because of her first class healthy living. However, it has become a victim of junk food from the United States. This adoption of unhealthy lifestyle has made nutritionists to note a drastic change in the health of people. This is a negative impact on the culture and health of citizens as a result of globalization (Dollahite, 2005).
Secondly, globalization brings economic development in a country. Like in the Agrarian revolution, present technological milestone has kept a country like China in the public interest of advanced machinery (Knickerbocker, 2004). However, these technologies have not guaranteed the foremost reason of globalization which is unification of the continent. Hence, it does not bring the idea of a ‘global village’. Social, political, and economical status of countries differ in high percentages. That is, the developed, developing, and underdeveloped countries have different standards. There is brain-drain and outsourcing of young laborers from other countries by countries like United States and Britain. There is rivalry of industries and unfavorable competition because of political power sought by the countries. This competition shows dissimilarity instead of unification.
Contrary, there are positive effects of globalization as discussed below. First, due to economic improvement there is a fast mode of knowledge transfer. In recent studies, knowledge in economy, health and technology have spread through many countries and eased the exchange of factual information. Globalization presents useful innovation tools in fields like communication and transport to quickly relay information. The political and social integration of countries in a common language has improved the relay of useful information. Stock exchange knowledge has improved the economic perspectives of investors. Also, aid food and Western antibiotics knowledge has been exchanged in the global village thus saving and improving life. There is a global constitution that seems to govern global citizens. Through the advanced technology of the internet, bodies like the United Nations keep an eye on crimes committed. Unification and integration of countries gives the idea of peaceful and harmonious lives of individuals. This gives them ample time to carry on with their everyday jobs. This is a chance given to the United Nations by globalization to prevent wars and potential atrocities to humans (Lehmer, 2002).
Lastly, globalization has improved the economic status of nations. For example, in the industrial sector, there is free movement of goods and essential material that help the developing countries to make significant profit (Lehmer, 2002). These financial markets give room to traders to save and discover investment opportunities. The raw materials and finished products are exchanged through a global market which improves the gross domestic product and individual income ration. Various companies have merged and boosted each other. Some have been privatized. Important gadgets like mobile phones have eased communication and provided job opportunities thus improving economic status. Hence, this reduces rivalry that may result in political uproar. In addition, all this superb industrial activities zero down to improved infrastructure, better health care, and improved economic standards due to a high income (Knickerbocker, 2004).
In conclusion, this paper gives a systematic approach on globalization. That is, globalization as an approach to unify the world or a genie to be set out of the bottle. The effectiveness of globalization has been discussed and the negative implications highlighted. Therefore, one is able to find that globalization does not only have positive effects on economy, social and cultural fabrics but also there are negative effects which need to be discussed.
Dollahite, N. E. & Haun, J. (2005 ). Source work: Academic Writing from Sources. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Knickerbocker, B. (2004). If poor get richer, does world see progress? The Christian Science Monitor, 17(1), 8.
Lehmer, A. & Phelan-Caceres, J. (2002). Bucking the corporate future. Earth Island Journal, 16 (4), 11.