definitions of globalization

SPJMR , 2021

Globalization has become a familiar enough word, the meaning of which has been discussed by others before me during this conference. Let me nonetheless outline briefly what I understand by the term. I shall then go on to consider what has caused it. The bulk of my paper is devoted to discussing what we know, and what we do not know, about its consequences. I will conclude by considering what policy reactions seem to be called for.

The end of the Cold War provided a major shock for scholars of politics and policy in at least two respects. First, it provided a classic example of the limitations of both social and policy sciences predictive capacity. Few foresaw, let alone predicted, the tumultuous events that marked the end of the decade. Second, those events simultaneously dislodged the organizing principle-the foundation-upon which much of the study of international relations was constructed in the postwar period. 1 The parsimony and simplicity of bipolarity signaled the hegemony of structural arguments in international studies and a corresponding ascendancy of questions posed by security studies over those relating to international and comparative political economy. Scholars and policy analysts alike thus favored these approaches, employing theories such as deterrence, compellence, and modernization in political science, while policy analysts often subsumed critiques of American policy in the Third World for the sake of strategic advantage over the Communist bloc.

The end of the Cold War provided a major shock for scholars of politics and policy in at least two respects. First, it provided a classic example of the limitations of both social and policy sciences predictive capacity. Few foresaw, let alone predicted, the tumultuous events that marked the end of the decade. Second, those events simultaneously dislodged the organizing principle-the foundation-upon which much of the study of international relations was constructed in the postwar period. 1 The parsimony and simplicity of bipolarity signaled the hegemony of structural arguments in international studies and a corresponding ascendancy of questions posed by security studies over those relating to international and comparative political economy. Scholars and policy analysts alike thus favored these approaches, employing theories such as deterrence, compellence, and modernization in political science, while policy analysts often subsumed critiques of American policy in the Third World for the sake of strategic advantage over the Communist bloc.

The usefulness of globalization as an analytical concept has largely been eclipsed by its growing fashionableness. The term's currency has distended its meaning to the point where it has gained the studied ambiguity and diffuseness of an advertiser's slogan. When powerful interests equate globalization with the progression of human freedom even as they work to insulate their institutions from political intervention, there is reason to believe that, as a label for contemporary social changes, globalization obscures more than it illuminates. Perhaps like the similarly popular phrase "peace through commerce," which in today's neoliberal climate really means "commerce through pacification," the meaning of globalization has to be inverted to be made useful. What does globalization mean? Mavbe rather than the growing cohesion of a world order, the word refers to the breakdown of order on a previously unimagined scale. At the very least, in its current uses "globalization" is replete with ambiguities and contradictions that must be disentangled to make the term useful for understanding the contemporary socio-cultural scene.

2013

Globalization means different things for different people. It is a gelatinous, rubbery, ubiquitous and mercurial term; Scholars put it as multi-dimensional. One cannot get hold of exact tangible definition, neither a clear historical trace of it.

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL WORK (Autonomous), NIRMALA NIKETAN, University of Mumbai , 2021

The 21st century has been the era of Globalization, Privatization and Liberalization. Among all of these three concepts, the concept of Globalization has changed all the dimensions of society whether it is political, economical or cultural. It has transformed the world into a homogenized shrink village and has resulted into Time-Space compression. The revolution in the field of Information and Communication Technologies has been worked as a major tool of Globalization. Sometimes it also showcases a dualism between two different values and culture and creates a 'digital divide' within the society. Thus, the process of Globalization has its own characteristics and there are many concepts that try to define Globalization in their own perspective. But this paper tries to review all existing literature and to understand the notion of Globalization according to the contemporary period and how it has been implicated in this era of post-modernization.

2018

What is globalization? Why do we hear this word so often? When does it begin? The theory of globalization today is a field of intensive and multidisciplinary debate and there often are opposing views of the mentioned phenomenon. The present paper does not seek to provide precise answers, but shows the differing and sometimes controversial views of globalization, since it is necessary to evaluate all the opinions, pros and cons before drawing any personal conclusions.

an unpublished paper submitted to" The Symposium …

Knowledge of globalization is substantially a function of how the concept is defined. After ... Jan Aart Scholte Department of Politics and International Studies University of Warwick Coventry CV4 7AL United Kingdom Email: [email protected] ... There are few terms that we ...

Eirp Proceedings, 2013

The globalization phenomenon represents a timely experience of our world. Due to the technological, cultural, economic, social, political, military, and other, progress, there is the perception t some phenomena in one part of the world have a global impact, not only a strictly local or regional one. Theoretical models both in the Anglo may be described in the framework of glo becomes a concept which has to be reevaluated in the present context of globalization. We refrained from considering the process of globalization in a strictly determinist manner. Acco able to consider globalization much more lucratively for our theoretical endeavor in a multicausal, dialectic logic, as we shall include contradictory concepts in the first instance, in a more general framework. We shall consider that the difference among the theorists of globalization may be understood if we permanently keep in sight the difference between a monocausal logic and a multicausal one. The most lucrative, for our endeavor, is to place ourselves in a multicausal int four main coordinates: economic, political, social, and cultural make a differentiated conceptual universe in the first instance, yet perfectly harmonized in the semantic universe of the

International Social Science Journal, 1999

2008

Although in its simplistic sense globalization refers to the widening, deepening and speeding up of global interconnectedness, such a definition begs further elaboration. ... Globalization can be located on a continuum with the local, national and regional. At one end of the continuum lie social and economic relations and networks which are organized on a local and/or national basis; at the other end lie social and economic relations and networks which crystallize on the wider scale of regional and global interactions. Globalization can be taken to refer to those spatio-temporal processes of change which underpin a transformation in the organization of human affairs by linking together and expanding human activity across regions and continents. Without reference to such expansive spatial connections, there can be no clear or coherent formulation of this term. ... A satisfactory definition of globalization must capture each of these elements: extensity (stretching), intensity, veloci...

The end of the Cold War provided a major shock for scholars of politics and policy in at least two respects. First, it provided a classic example of the limitations of both social and policy sciences predictive capacity. Few foresaw, let alone predicted, the tumultuous events that marked the end of the decade. Second, those events simultaneously dislodged the organizing principle-the foundation-upon which much of the study of international relations was constructed in the postwar period. 1 The parsimony and simplicity of bipolarity signaled the hegemony of structural arguments in international studies and a corresponding ascendancy of questions posed by security studies over those relating to international and comparative political economy. Scholars and policy analysts alike thus favored these approaches, employing theories such as deterrence, compellence, and modernization in political science, while policy analysts often subsumed critiques of American policy in the Third World for the sake of strategic advantage over the Communist bloc.

Journal of World-Systems Research, 1999

There is no single agreed definition of globalization. indeed. some argue that its significance has been much exaggerated. As the ever-increasing numbers of books and articles discussing different aspects of it suggest, it appears to be an idea whose time has come in sociology in panicular and in the social sciences in general. Waters (1995: 1) was being too cautious when he suggested that it may be 'the concept of the 1990s'. Arguments about globalization look set to last well into the twenty-first century."' One problem in understanding much of the globalization literature. as I pointed out in c.:Iuptet• 1. is ihdi IHll .til ihoSL' wl"' lise' !Ill' ll'ttn dislitlguish il 'k-.trlv t•nou.~h r•rom internationalization. and some wntl'rs appe.tr to use the terms interchangeably. In this book a clear distinction will be drawn between the international. the transnational, and the global. The hyphen in international is to signify that this conception of globalization is founded on the existing even if changing system of states. The transnational signifies the emergence of forces and institutions not founded on the state system though they are constrained by and simultaneously transcend it in specific ways. The global signifies an already achieved state of globalization but. in my view. this is still fairly uncommon. Thus, for example. most major transnational corporations are certainly globalizing. but few if any are actually global yet. in the sense that they can operate entirely free of states and the interstate system. However. the power of these globalizing corporations and the transnational capitalist class that owns and controls them all over the world ensures the hegemony of capitalist globalization in the present era (Sklair 2001). These issues are difficult to theorize and to research empirically. The social sciences are largely based on concepts of society that identify the unit of analysis with a particular country (for example, British. Japanese, US. Russian. Indian society). subsystems within countries (British education, the Japanese economy. American culture. Russian politics. Indian religion) or comparisons between single countries and groups of them (modeJ;n Britain and traditional India, declining America and ascendant Japan or vice versa. rich and poor countries. countries of the North and the South). This general approach. statecentrism. is still useful in many respects and there are clearly good reasons for it. Not the least of these is that most historical and contemporary sociological data has feen collected on nation-states. However. most globalization theorists argue that the narion-state is no longer the only important unit of analysis and some argue that it is now less important in some fundamental respects than other. globalizing. forces. The'se globalizing forces include mass media and the corporations that own and control them. transnational corporations (some of which are richer than the majority of countries) and even social movements that spread ideas like global environmental responsibility. universal