Search results

As globalization has influence on social sustainability mainly due to its effects on income distribution as well as labor share and profile at the local and global levels, sustainable development and globalization need to be examined from the social sustainability point of view. Social sustainability aspect of development and globalization is mainly affected by the income distribution and labor aspects. Labor share, degree of equality in the income distribution, labor competence, degree of elimination of child labor, degree of labor intensiveness in the production, labor's level of competence and productivity are among the main factors which can be influenced by globalization, its opportunities, and challenges as well as by its transformation into the postglobalization phase. These factors can influence social sustainability. In other words, there is a link and relationship among sustainable development, globalization, and postglobalization, income distribution and labor. Enhancing welfare of the societies and social sustainability necessitates focusing on the ways to achieve equality in the income distribution, and enhanced working conditions at the local and global levels across countries and industries. Based on an in-depth literature review, this chapter aims to assess and rethink sustainable development and globalization from the income distribution and labour aspects. Furthermore, this chapter covers and examines effects of globalization on low-income and developed countries. This chapter provides suggestions and recommendations on how to enhance welfare of the society at the local and global levels in the post-growth phase. This chapter is expected to be useful to policy makers, researchers, and academics.

In this chapter, we argue from a theoretical perspective that globalisation has impacted differentiation within higher education systems. The three propositions about mechanisms affecting diversity distinguished by van Vught (environmental conditions, competition for resources and academic norms) remain the same, but the initial conditions have changed. Governmental policy, in particular, affects the degree of openness of higher education systems (positively or negatively), either through (de-)regulation or by affecting higher education institutions’ strategies for internationalisation. Thus, we add as a fourth proposition that increasing institutional autonomy increases system diversity in the context of globalisation.

Purpose – Since the 1960s, the affluent democracies have experienced substantial changes in earnings inequality at the same time as heightening economic globalization. This paper investigates the relationship between these two processes.

Methodology/Approach – I use fixed-effects models, and comprehensive measures of globalization and earnings inequality to scrutinize the relationship between the two in 18 affluent democracies. Although past studies concentrate on worker displacement, I examine how globalization affected earnings inequality before and after controlling for manufacturing employment and unemployment as indicators of displacement.

Findings – Initial evidence suggests net migration and investment openness have moderate positive effects, but trade openness has larger, more significant positive effects. In full models, only trade openness remains robustly significant. For a standard deviation increase in trade openness, earnings inequality should increase by between 1/5th and 2/5th of a standard deviation.

Originality/Value of paper – Beyond displacement, this study encourages investigation of power relations (e.g., class capacities of employers vs. workers) and institutional change (e.g., practices of firms) as mechanisms by which globalization contributes to inequality.

Purpose – While previous studies have highlighted opportunities, this chapter sheds light on the negative effects of globalization that mature European multinational enterprises (MNEs) encounter.

Design/methodology/approach – We develop an extended network perspective to argue that globalization has resulted in several network-related threats for mature European MNEs.

Findings – European MNEs encounter three types of negative effects. First, globalization has caused local problems to increasingly spill over to other parts of MNE networks. Second, globalization has bred or strengthened countervailing powers, such as emerging-market MNEs, supranational governmental bodies, and international non-governmental organizations, which have eroded the power of mature European MNEs by entering their networks. Third, while globalization has caused the economic networks of MNEs to expand, it has made critical production factors scarcer since the availability of labour, land and natural resources has not increased accordingly. We conclude that globalization acts as a double-edged sword, which has not only offered opportunities for mature European MNEs but has also led them to experience important new and intensified threats.

Social implications – Earlier studies have shown that globalization can have positive effects for MNEs and negative effects for the sovereignty of nation states, domestic employment and the natural environment. The findings of the present study imply that globalization can also backfire on mature MNEs, thereby undermining their competitive position or even jeopardizing their continuity.

Originality/value – The negative effects of globalization for MNEs have remained understudied. Our contribution is to systematically analyze the neglected yet important ‘dark side of globalization’ that mature European MNEs encounter.

This chapter aims to critically analyse the implications that the national protectionist policies have on the global supply and value chains and the relocation of production. The analysis is based on the assumptions that the global economy is facing the possibility of decoupling of many trade connections, and this trend favours de-globalisation processes that have long been promoted by populism, nationalism and economic protectionism. It is concluded that global supply, production and value chains although being economically efficient are no longer any more secure under national protectionist policies, and therefore, the relocation of production processes is mainly due to the increase in the level of income and wages of the developing countries that are the destination and which reduce the advantages to relocate.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to contribute to the literature on work, gender, and globalization using an intersectional approach.

Methodology – The data for this chapter are derived from two years of qualitative fieldwork at a Mexican multinational corporation. I conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 86 employees at all levels of the organizational hierarchy as well as content analysis of the company magazine.

Findings – My findings suggest that globalization leads to similar benefits for women and men, with respect to autonomy and decision making in the workplace, but are framed distinctly depending on class. Globalization is gendered in that it offers an additional benefit of economic independence to women. Women at different levels of occupational prestige, however, experience the globalizing process in diverse ways. I conclude by suggesting that globalization results in a tension within the company in how to incorporate female workers in a more meaningful manner.

Originality/value of chapter – Research on globalization in the developing world primarily examines factory workers or women in certain occupations, such as domestic workers. This study focuses on an overlooked group of workers that includes female and male white-collar workers. It offers a comparative analysis of the gendered and class-based effects of globalization on workers of different ranks within the same company. Most globalization studies on Mexico center on the Maquila industry, whereas this study examines workers in a Mexican-owned international company.

We address here how the U.S. neoliberal policy regime developed and how its reconstructed vision of modernization, which culminated, under the rubric of globalization, was neutralized by 9/11 and neoconservative geopolitics. We analyze the phases in the rise of neoliberalism, and provide a detailed map of its vision of global modernization at its high tide under Clinton. We also address how the Bush Doctrine's unilateral, preemptive polices and the consequent War on Terror and Iraq War eroded U.S. legitimacy as the globalization system's hegmon and shifted the discourse from globalization to empire. Cold War modernization theorists, neoliberal globalization advocates, and Bush doctrine neoconservatives all drew on an American exceptionalist tradition that portrays the U.S. as modernity's “lead society,” attaches universal significance to its values, policies, and institutions, and urges their worldwide diffusion. All three traditions ignore or diminish the importance of substantive equality and social justice. We suggest that consequent U.S. policy problems might be averted by recovery of a suppressed side of the American tradition that stresses social justice and holds that democracy must start at home and be spread by example rather than by exhortation or force. Overall, we explore the contradictory U.S. role in an emergent post-Cold War world.

We suggest that globalization, a process that fosters greater interdependence and mutual awareness among actors around the world in their economic, political, social, and cultural interactions, will also decrease the social distance among them and thus increase individuals' propensities to cooperate with distal others. We demonstrate in a multi-country public goods experiment that among the four domains of individual participation in globalization, economic participation in globalization has the least effect in prompting cooperation. Conversely, the other three domains of globalization have strong effects on individual cooperation, and this is robust to different specifications of the econometric model.

North America is both geographically large and demographically diverse, which makes a discussion about globalization in North America difficult to distinguish from globalization writ large. This chapter attempts to do so nonetheless by examining tangible, virtual, and envisioned versions of the globalization of education in North America specific to trends in immigration (and migration), identity, and imagination. A brief explanation of theories of globalization that intersect in the North American context includes world systems, neo-institutionalism, cosmopolitanism, neoliberalism, and post-colonialism, but could include many more. This chapter also suggests that the globalization of education in North America is not limited to the continent of North America due to the many external or global educational entanglements that North Americans have with other countries and regions worldwide.