W14. Blog assignment 4. posted by So Jeong Yeon (연소정)

What Is the relation between economics and globalization?

 

  The article about 'Economic Globalization' written by Peter Dicken breaks a misleading stereotype that global corporations trample largely unhindered across national boundaries, emasculating the autonomy of nationstates. To provide a more nuanced explanation of the nature and significance of TNCs in the processes of economic globalization, the writers deals with five related issues.

 

  The first issue is 'the scale and geographical distribution of TNCs in the global economy.' The transnational corporation (TNC) is the central actor. These corporations called global corporations, the allegedly ‘placeless’ giants, owe no allegiance to any particular country or community. TNC activity is measured using statistics on foreign direct investment(FDI). This is simply direct investment that occurs across national boundaries, that is, when a firm from one country buys a controlling investment in a firm in another country or where a firm sets up a branch or a subsidiary operation in another country.

  The second issue is 'why and how corporations engage in transnational activities.' The reasons for TNC activity can be explained with two parts- market-oriented investment and asset-oriented investment. The one reason is related to market-oriented investment. The business firms may have reached saturation point in its domestic market or transportation costs may be excessive so they have to extend their operations outside their home countries to increase profitability. The other reason is for asset-oriented investment. The assets that firms need to produce and sell their products and services are also geographically very unevenly distributed. So TNCs look for cheap labor or well-educated, highly skilled and strongly motivated workers located in ‘quality’ communities.

  The firms develop transnational activities through ‘greenfield’ investment, engagement with other firms through either merger and acquisition or some form of strategic collaboration. Greenfield investment far from being the most common mode of overseas expansion is simply the building of totally new facilities. But the firms may well prefer to establish a presence in an overseas location through an involvement with an existing firm. Meanwhile, many firms have preferred to merge with, or to acquire, another firm to expand their presence in a particular overseas location. Another widely used mode of TNC expansion is to enter into a strategic collaboration with one or more other firms. Many companies are forming not just single alliances but networks of alliances, in which relationships between partner firms are increasingly multilateral and polygamous. They cooperates to pursue a specific strategic objective, to enable firms to achieve a specific goal that they cannot achieve on their own. But they remain not only separate but also usually competitors. This transnational activities are adding a collective competition to the economic landscape.

    The third issue is 'the geographical embeddedness of transnational corporations.' TNCs have the place-specific characteristics of the countries and communities in which they operate to produce a set of distinctive outcomes. In other words, there is the complexity of the embeddedness process in which both place of origin and the other places in which TNCs operate. Within any national situation there will be distinctive corporate cultures, arising from the firm’s own specific corporate history, which make it behave strategically in particular ways.

   The fourth issue is 'the ‘webs of enterprise’ manifested in transnational production networks. TNCs can be considered as ‘a dense network at the centre of a web of relationships’ The corporate headquarters of TNCs invariably remain in the firm’s home country but Some kinds of headquarters functions may well be dispersed to key locations within the firm’s transnational network, TNCs are far more difficult to coordinate and control than firms whose activities are confined to a single national space.

    The last issue is 'the power relationships between TNCs and other actors in the global economy.' As you can see, TNCs are constantly engaged in processes of restructuring, reorganization and rationalization. TNC networks are always in a continuous state of flux. Such restructuring and rationalization inevitably causes tensions TNCs and other significant actors like states, local communities, labour, consumers, civil society organizations in the global economy. TNCs have their potential ability to take advantage of geographical differences in the availability and cost of resources and in state policies and to switch and re-switch operations between locations. Among the multiplicity of regulatory institutions, and allowing for the proliferation of international and sub-national bodies, the national state remains especially important. States still have significant power to control access to their territories and to define rules of operation. In other words, TNCs may be constrained in their action.

 

   One of the most exciting things about articles is 'strategic alliances', one of the ways in which multinational companies expand. TNCs expands their multinational presence by strategically partnering with one or more other companies. What is interesting about this approach is that while working together for specific strategic goals, they are also in a competitive relationship. The advantage of this approach is that companies can combine competencies in a way that is mutually beneficial. By gathering resources and capabilities and rationalizing production, synergy effects can be achieved. At the same time, however, there is a risk of losing its core technology from the other partner company in the course of the cooperation because it is in competition. Noteworthy is that despite the drawbacks the proliferation of such alliances has greatly increased the complexity and diversity of TNC operations in the world economy,

   Here is one question. It is like being in a dilemma situation that you are in a relationship of cooperation and competition. How can they maintain cooperation without losing their technologies? I am curious about how to provide the company's technology to cooperate and how to solve the security problem, I want to discuss this problem with other students in class. I think it seems to be a very difficult problem.

   Finally, the last sentence of this author is impressive. As economic globalization progresses, the impact of multinational corporations is great. There is concern that there is a risk of going beyond the autonomy or control of their state and the country to which it intends to enter, but there are still other international entities that will offset the immense power and power of the multinational corporations and balance the forces among the entities in the world economy.

 

W10. Blog assignment 3 posted by So Jeong Yeon (연소정)

What Is the relation between politics and globalization?

 

   The topic of blog post 3 assignment is the 'What is the relation between politics and globalization?' This time, let's look deep into political globalization and talk about that question. Above all, let's look over the article written by Gerard Delanty and Chris Rumford.

 

   The writers said that globalization refers to the multidimensional, accelerated and interconnected organization of space and time across national borders. It concerns an approach to the social world that stresses not postnational and transnational process, but also a consciousness of the compressed nature of space and time. According to their argument, political globalization is a tension between three processes- global geopolitics, global normative culture and polycentric networks. These interact to produce the complex field of global politics.

   The first dimension of political globalization refer to 'the geopolitics of global power'. Despite the rise of the United States as a global power, the US will be challenged by many centres of power. The second dimension of political globalization is 'the rise of a global normative culture'. This is diffused in global political communication. Human rights lies at the centre of a global cosmopolitanism and it also includes environmental concerns such as sustainable development. As a result of global communication, political communication is now global in scope, not confined to national borders. And the political communication has become the basis of a global normative culture. This global normative culture has come into existence beyond the state system and exists in a relation of tension with states.

   The third dimension of political globalization is polycentric networks. The processes of political globalization is associated with networks and flows, new sources of mobility and communication. And it means new relationships between the individual, state and society. For example, global civil society could be a different kind of global political order. Global society features polycentrism. It does not have one space but many. It is not based on any single principle of organization. So polycentric networks like this create new opportunities for autonomy and the recognition of a range of new actors and new modes of governance.

   These three dimension of political globalization can be examined around four social transformations. The first one is the transformation of the nation-state, nationality and citizenship. According to Susan Strange, new economic forces come into play challenging the power of the nation-state, with the transition from a world economy dominated by national economies to a global economy. As a result, the nation-state must to share sovereignty with other global players like non-governmental actors leading to multi-governance. The movement towards transnational authority allows a more functional state system to operate. During the processes, nationality and citizenship are decoupled. And this is attributed to the impact of global normative culture. The second thing is the transformation of the public sphere and political communication. Habermas said the public sphere is the site of politics. The writers said the global normative culture is diffused in many ways within public spheres and is carried by many different kinds of social agents. Third, it is the transformation of civil society. With increasing opportunities for interaction between domestic and international politics, the global civil society can grow. Lastly, it is the transformation of space and borders. It means that spaces and borders do not have to be conceived as unitary and exclusive.

 

   The interesting things in this article are the contradiction of the political globalization and the role of civil society. The writers point out one contradiction is that between the tendency of globalization to homogenize and increasing emphasis on and respect for difference. It is easy to think that political globalization means only the proliferation of liberal democracy and as the thesis of the 'end of history' written by Francis Fukuyama, it means the end of ideology. I thought so before reading this article. But the authors said it is the spread of more and different kinds of ideology. They argue the globalization just gives the democratic nation-state worldwide acceptability. The democratic nation-state in the world has given rise to very different kinds of political cultures. I think this misconception comes from overemphasis on interconnection and transnational processes of globalization. Also It is because of lack of understanding for mid-progress of political globalization.

   In the same vein, It was impressive(although this is what many people know well) that the importance of civil society to political globalization lies in its potential to organize resistance to the global hegemony of capitalism or the United States. At this part, I think the globalization is not just mean the alignment with and combination to strong and global flow, a unified form like capitalism or democracy.

   In conclusion, this article made me think deeply about 'What is the globalization?' Now, one question arises. Are all these processes of political globalization inevitable and natural consequence in human history? (Think of Capitalism in economic dimension or democracy in political dimension.) Are things like global civil society and phenomena like polycentic networks already foresighted to appear? In other words, is this direction of globalization steady or flexible, inevitable or evitable(there are another directions)? I wonder this, so I want to think about this with other students.

W6. Blog assignment 2, Cultural globalization posted by So Jeong Yeon (연소정)

  

What Is the relation between culture and globalization?

 

Last time, I posted blog about 'what is globalization?' At that time. we could look into dimensions of globalization. It is the cultural, the social, the political and the economic. We learned that these dimensions are not totally distinct and they influence each other part. Today, I'll look deep into cultural globalization and talk about 'what is the relation between culture and globalization?' Before answering, let's look over the article written by John Tomlinson.

 

Before understanding the meaning of cultural globalization, he starts to understand two consituent terms, culture and globalization. He pointed out a deep misconception that in some readings 'culture' is described to be a inert category, something that people experience and imbibe but don't themselves produce or shape. He, rather, stresses the active, transformative nature of the appropriation of cultural goods, mentioning other opinion of scholars. According to his argument, we should think of cultural processed primarily as oriented toward the construction of socially shared meanings. What culture is for is to generate meaning in life. And the practices and processes of meaning construction inspire, motivate and orient people toward particular, individual or collective choices and actions. In other words, cultural globalization involves the systemic integration of lots of individual actions into the working of social institutions which appear autonomously to govern our lives.

Subsequently, in his article, he mentioned cultural imperialism, 'a kind of totalitarianism of culture.' He said there is an assumption that cultural globalization implies a form of cultural imperialism and a tendency to imagine globalization pushing us toward an all-encompassing 'global culture.' In similat context, there is the concept of 'Deterrtorialization.' We live local lives, but globalization is rapidly changing our experience of this locality. It means the loss of the natural relation of culture to geographical and social territories. In other words, It implies that the significance of the geographical location of a culture is eroding.

Deterritorialization refers to the reach of socialeconomic connectivity into the localities in which everyday life is experienced and conducted if globalization is the spread of complex connections arcoss distance. This results that this weakening of the traditional ties between cultural experience and geographical territory will prove to be the most far-reaching effect of cultural globalization. But, he said it is not simply the loss of the experience of a local culture. On the other hand, Localities can thrive in globalization.
 

That opinion and the point of veiw is so interesting thing for me. Many people including me are likely to think that many form of deterritorialization disturbs and transforms local experience, and in the long run particular locality and culture identity disappears. Before I read this article, I almost thought in that way and I was so afraid of the negative aspect only. But the writer suggested the positive potential of deterritorialization. He said that in changing our experience of local life, it may promote a new sensibility of cultural openness, human mutuality and global ethical responsibility.

And he points out identities are not something like possessions, but constructs. And all cultures construct meaning through practices of collective symbolization. It is a novel view. I think his opinion suggest new view for the people who think cultural globalization only threatens cultural identity. To add my opinion, culture identity seems to be not capricious, so it look like immovable but it do not stay unchanged. Cultures construct the people's lives and people also construct their cultures.

 

 

As John Tomlinson says, we are living in a much more globally connected world today than before. Connectivity defines our use of communications technologies such as computer, the internet, SNS and mobile phones. The technological developments-media and communication technologies- change our lifestyle environment and culture. Telemediatization is shaping our lives and values.

These days, according to increasing of connectivity, people in many other countries can follow particular thought and ideas, styles etc. In these situation, indeed, as the writer's argument, can we take an optimistic view of Cultural globalization? I agreed with the writer's opinion partly -the positive potential of deterritorialization- but I'm still worry about with side effect of cultural imperialism. In this dilemma, how could and should we do? I want to discuss this question.

Extra blog post 2 / posted by SoJeong Yeon (연소정)

World Values Survey Data Analysis

 

In last class, we learned about World Values Survey(WVS) data analysis. During class, we saw some graphs of surveys of Korean society and world society, and debated that result and reason. Also We personally had few times to search some other result of WVS. There were some interesting and surprising graphs, and this time I'll post my own analysis about the interesting graphs in the survey, 'homosexuals'. The question and result are as follows.

 

Q. Would not like to have as neighbors: Homosexuals?

World Values Survey Wave: 2010-2014

   

I went to WVS website and chose year, countries and question. I chose 6 countries including China, South Korea, Netherland, Poland, Sweden, and United States. And I checked out two result at different times.

In first gragh(2010-2014), the percentage of 'Mentioned' in South Korea was about 80% and highest among 6 nations, and China was ranked second. Most people of two countries both would not like to have homosexuals as neighbors. On the other hand, the percentages of 'Not mentioned' in Swenden, Netherland and United States were higher than those of other countries. It shows they don't care that their neighbors are homosexuals or not. It also means that many people of those three countries are in a position to accept homosexuality. To know the reason, I searched other data and resources. I could figure out one of the reasons from institutional aspect and social system.

Netherland was the first nation in the world which has legalized homosexual marriage in 2001. Swenden has also legalized homosexuality and homosexual marriage in 2009 and U.S. in 2015. But South Korea and China still prohibit homosexual marriage by law. It is likely that people of those two countries think homosexual neighbor is stranger and criminal. As you know, the system and institution could affect a person's perception.

 

World Values Survey Wave: 2005-2009

 

But the perception of homosexuality in South Korea(2010-2014) has improved than before. Looking at second graph(2005-2009), we can see that the result was changing with time. In the past, the percentage of 'Mentioned' in South Korea was more higher, about 88%. The percentage of 'Mentioned' in China was about 70%. It was 20% more higher than now.

Then, how could the animosity of homosexuality in South Korea decrease although South Korea still ban homosexual marriage by law? One of the reasons is that Korean movies and TV programs which are featured by a homosexual and homosexuality were increasing than before. According global wave, such material became a issue which we have to think about. We became to come across more a homosexual and homosexuality in movies and popular culture and there are less people opposing homosexuality. I think we could be more accepting a homosexual as our neighbor.

 

 

Source: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jsp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality

W3. Extra blog post / posted by SoJeong Yeon (연소정)

Q. What are some of the major issues in world politics right now? 

 

  This week, we learned about the political globalization. During class, I debated this question with my partner. Also I thought about subtle differences of 'becoming an issue all over the world' and 'something to be globalized.' There were many opinions but I'll post blog about two major global issues among them.

 

Image from Goolge

   Firstly, opposition to immigration becomes an global issue. Today, by increasing interchange between countries, a large number of people emigrate to other country from their country. There are many reasons- for education or job seeking and because of natural disasters- that they immigrate. Some support the immigration policy, but others maintain that immigration needs to be limited. In such situations, opposition to immigration has become a significant political issue in many countries.
 



Image from Google(<-link)

   
     Specially, in the United States, opposition to immigration was one of President Donald Trump's campaign promises. This is still controversy issue now because the project effects social, economic costs. The opponent to immigration think that if other country people immigrate to their territory, it will be hard to get job(the job competition will be strong) and to receive education and social services. Also they oppose the immigration because of negative environmental impact from accelerated population growth, increased crime rates, and changes in traditional identities and values. In particular, in the United States, illegal immigration is a large issue.

   I think it is related to opposition to multiculturalism and racism. So this problem is the more sensitive issue. I also think the opposition to immigration is opposite to globalization flow that more and more people from other country communicate with each other and that multiculturalism become an important topic.

LGBT (Image from Google)

   Secondly, homosexuality and homosexual marriage become a global issue. Homosexuality has always been a controversial topic, but now is no longer an unacceptable behavior in some countries. These days, homosexuality doesn't seem as foreign as before. Many states in the U.S. have legalized homosexuality and homosexual marriage. Some countries in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa, still oppose to homosexuality because this is related to religious issues. But the homosexual movement is alive and thriving in Europe and other countries. This implies the spread of the consciousness that homosexuality is an acceptable alternative lifestyle, because all human are created equal and basic human rights should be respected.

 

W3. Blog assignment 1 "What Is Globalization?" posted by SoJeong Yeon(연소정)

 

   Today's people live under the great influence of the phenomenon of globalization almost everyday. It is not too much to say that globalization is a phenomenon of the 21st century. Maybe there is no one who have never heard of this word, 'Globalization,' Then, what is Globalization? I'll answer this question based on lecture, reading and some articles.

 

   Globalization signifies increasing connectivity and international exchange. In other words, this means that interchange between nations, governments, individuals, and organizations increase in many aspects. The object which is exchanged in globalization includes not only material things like product, food but also non-material things like idea, information and symbol. Meanwhile, increasing connectivity also means increasing interdependency in economic and social areas. We can call it a 'super-connected society.' Each country and each individual influence each other, and they can't disregard existence and influence of other country and other person. They go with the same direction, a larger flow of globalization.



   The level of connectivity between different regions has been increased by improvements in infrastructure like electronic communication and transportation. These days, thanks to development of the Internet and mobile phones, people in many other countries can communicate with each other and share their thought and culture such as ideas, styles, religions etc. Facebook is a typical example.

Image1 from Google(<-link)

   Meanwhile, we can classify globalization in four dimensions. It is the cultural, the social, the political and the economic. But these dimensions are not totally distinct and independent. They are not mutually exclusive. The cultural globalization can have attributes of the political or the economic globalization.

 

  

   The interesting thing which I want to talk about more deeply is the concept 'Mcdonaldization.' I think it is a good instance which explains globalization phenomenon well. I first learned about this concept in another major class but I learned more about it in detail this time. From now on, through this concept, I'll think over the implication of globalization and double-sidedness of it.

   McDonaldization is a term used by sociologist George Ritzer in his book. He said that our society and its organizations are adapted to have the same characteristics that are found in fast food chains. These elements include efficiency, calculability, predictability and standardization, and control.

 



Image2 from Wikimedia Commons(<-link)

 

   Let's remind of our experience when we go to the Mcdonald. No matter where we goes, we can receive the same service and the same product every time. There is set formula or standard for making hamburgers and fries, so employees just follow the instructions in the manual. They are expected to do more with less and need to do it faster. And McDonald achieves efficiency by making customers do self service- waiting in line to order food and returning food tray after eating. 

   What's important thing in McDonaldization theory is that a society adopts the characteristics of a fast-food restaurant. This adaptation has ripple effects throughout all aspects of society. The principles of the fast-food restaurant, rationalization and scientific management, are coming to dominate more and more sectors of many societies in the world. This theory represent well what today's people value and how our lives are structured. Apparently, it is a spread of the fast food restaurant(material), but internally it is a diffusion of mentality, rational systems(immaterial).

 



   However, the McDonaldization could have many negative side effects. Excessive productivity efficiency hampers the creativity development. It does not promote inquiry or creativity. Particularly the bureaucracy like this can be a dehumanizing place.

   As you can see, Globalization has two sides. It isn't always a good thing. Then what should we do? We know that globalization is going on all around us. The pace and scope of the current globalization wave is unprecedented. I think to reject globalization wave just is not the right solution. Then how could we minimize side effects of globalization? What is the solution to this? Indeed, is there a realistic solution? I want to debate this with other friends.

 

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonaldization

https://www.thoughtco.com/mcdonaldization-of-society-3026751