5 Globalization - Pearson · PDF filecable worker for the provincial power company. Patti is an ele- ... with Canada placing sixth after Saudi Arabia and ... national contact between

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After you have studied this chap-ter, you will be able to answer thefollowing questions:

1. What is globalization?

2. How does globalization impactthe movement of people?

3. How does globalization impactthe paid and unpaid work ofwomen?

4. What are the main arguments forand against globalization?

5. How are the world’s nationsstratified?

6. What are the main sociologicaltheories of economic and socialdevelopment?

7. What makes Canada a semipe-ripheral country and why is thisimportant to know?

8. How is the system of globalstratification maintained?

Let’s consider three “average” families from different

parts of the world:

For Getu Mulleta, 33, and his wife, Zenebu, 28, of rural Ethiopia, life is a con-stant struggle to keep themselves and their seven children from starving. Theylive in a 320-square-foot (30 m2) manure-plastered hut with no electricity, gas, orrunning water. They have a radio, but the battery is dead. Surviving on $130 ayear, the family farms teff, a cereal grain.

The Mulletas’ poverty is not the result of a lack of hard work. Getu worksabout 80 hours a week, while Zenebu works even more. “Housework” forZenebu includes fetching water, making fuel pellets out of cow dung for theopen fire over which she cooks the family’s food, and cleaning animal stables.Like other Ethiopian women, she eats after the men.

In Ethiopia, the average male can expect to live to 48, and the averagefemale to 50.

The Mulletas’ most valuable possession is their oxen. Their wishes for thefuture? More animals, better seed, and a second set of clothing.

In Guadalajara, Mexico, Ambrosio and Carmen Castillo Balderas and theirfive children, ages two to ten, live in a four-room house. They also have a walledcourtyard, where the family spends a good deal of time. They even have awashing machine, which is hooked up to a garden hose that runs to a publicwater main hundreds of metres away. Like most Mexicans, they do not have atelephone, nor do they own a car. Unlike many, however, they own a refrigera-tor, a stereo, and a recent purchase that makes them the envy of their neigh-bours—a television.

Ambrosio, 29, works full-time as a produce wholesale distributor. He alsodoes welding on the side. The family’s total annual income is $3600. They spend57 percent of their income on food. Carmen works about 60 hours a week tak-ing care of their children and keeping their home spotless. The neatness of theirhome stands in stark contrast to the neighbourhood, which is lined with littereddirt roads. As in many other Mexican neighbourhoods, public utilities and roadwork do not keep pace with people’s needs.

The average life expectancy for males in Mexico is 70. For females, it is 76.The Castillo Balderas’ most valued possessions are their refrigerator and

television. Their wish for the future? A truck.

Sources: Menzel (1994); Population Reference Bureau (1995); Statistical Abstract (1997), Tables 713,723; Statistics Canada (2001a); Statistics Canada (2005c) Average income after tax by economicfamily types (2001–2005) www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/famil21a.htm.

Globalization5

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 94

Note: This advance copy is not a final version of the book. Further corrections may still be required.

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education Canada Inc, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

All rights reserved. This publication is protected by copyright and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission, write to the Permissions Department.

CHAPTER 5 Globalization 95

Kitchener, Ontario, is home to the Kellys—Rick, 36, Patti, 34,Julie, 14, and Michael, 10. The Kellys live in a four-bedroom, 2100-square-foot (195 m2), carpeted, ranch-style house, with centralheating and air conditioning, a basement, and a two-car garage.Their home is equipped with a refrigerator, washing machine,clothes dryer, dishwasher, garbage disposal, vacuum cleaner,food processor, microwave, and toaster. They own three radios,two CD players, four telephones (three cellular), two televisions,a camcorder, a DVD player, an Xbox with dozens of games, twoiPods, two computers with printers, and a laptop. They also havenumerous other small appliances, including blow dryers, ananswering machine, a coffee maker, and electric toothbrushes.There are stereo-radio-CD and DVD players in their van and car.

Rick works 40 hours a week as an electrical power line andcable worker for the provincial power company. Patti is an ele-mentary school teacher. Together they make $73 000* a year,plus benefits. The Kellys can choose from among dozens of

“Worlds Apart” would be an appropriate title for these photos, which illustrate how life chances depend on global stratification. On the left is

the Mulleta family of Ethiopia, featured in the opening vignette, standing in front of their home with all their material belongings. On the right is

the Skeen family of Texas, also surrounded by their possessions.

*This figure represents the median income for a Canadian family in 2006.

FIGURE 5.1 Stages of Capitalism, Expansion, and Intensification

super-stocked supermarkets. They spend $7046 on food for theirhome, and another $3520 eating at restaurants—a total of nearly15 percent of their annual income.

In Canada, the average life expectancy is 78 for males, 82 forfemales.

On the Kellys’ wish list are a new Jeep, a Nintendo Wii, aMacBook Air laptop, a boat, a camping trailer, and—one day—a vacation cabin.

WHAT IS GLOBALIZATION?Globalization is the latest stage in a process characterized bythe spread and intensification of capitalism across the globe(see Figure 5.1). Today, globalization involves the interactionand integration of increasing numbers of people throughinternational trade and investment, travel and tourism, andinformation technology and the mass media. Let’s look at

FPO

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 95

96 PART 2 The Individual, Social Groups, and Globalization

how globalization impacts the movement of people aroundthe world.

GLOBALIZATION AND PATTERNS OFMOVEMENT OF PEOPLEImmigrationInternational migration has mushroomed in recent decades.In 2005, 190 million people migrated to different countriesin the world. The United States had the highest migration rate,with Canada placing sixth after Saudi Arabia and France (seeTable 5.1). Together, the countries with the top ten migrationrates in 2005 accounted for over 51 percent of total worldmigration. What accounts for this upsurge in internationalmovement? Partly, migration can be attributed to the age-oldsearch for a better life in the richer countries of the world.Another factor, according to Anny Hefti (1997), is the glob-alization of communications technology. The pervasiveness ofmass communication, including television, film, video, andmusic, has reinforced dreams of an “easy life” abroad. Hefticontends that fax machines and cell phones have replacedsnail mail communications and that relations between immi-grant communities abroad and home communities have beenfacilitated by these new communications technologies. As aresult, migration has become very attractive.

Globalization and TourismThe growth in tourism is one indicator of the spread of inter-national contact between people facilitated by cheap airtravel, global communications, and the internet. In 1990,486 million international tourist arrivals were recordedworldwide. That figure jumped to 846 million in 2006—nearly doubling in size. Europe was the primary destinationin terms of money spent by international tourists in 2006,claiming just over 51 percent of the $733 billion spentworldwide. Asia and the Pacific shared second place, and theUnited States received approximately 21 percent of tourismdollars spent globally.

Today, tourism is arguably the world’s largest industry.According to predictions from the World TourismOrganization, international tourist arrivals will climb from850 million this year to 1.6 billion in 2020. Tourism is andwill remain the privilege of a few, however: only about 4 per-cent of the world’s population travel abroad.

As new forms of tourism gain prominence—ecotourism,ethnic tourism, “roots” and heritage tourism—the industryhas increasingly become integral to every nation in theworld. Many developing countries, facing debt burdens andworsening trade terms, have turned to tourism in the hopethat it will attract foreign exchange and investment.Simultaneously, leading international agencies such as theWorld Bank and the United Nations, and business organiza-tions such as the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC)have been substantially involved in making tourism a run-for-profit global industry. However, critics often view tourismin developing countries as an extension of former colonialconditions. Unequal trading relationships, dependence onforeign interests, and the division of labour have relegatedpoor countries in the South to becoming even more involvedin the uneven and often environmentally detrimental devel-opment of tourist attractions and facilities to placate theexpectations of tourists from the affluent North. The flip sideto globalization and tourism is legal and illegal emigrationfrom developing countries to more affluent regions such asCanada, the United States, and the European Union.

Globalization and Women’s WorkEconomic globalization includes cutting costs, especiallylabour costs, which usually means downsizing or closingfacilities in Canada or the U.S. and re-locating to other coun-tries where labour costs and taxes are low and environmen-tal protections lax. People in poorer countries are oftenforced from rural farms and either travel to where new jobsare located or leave in search of a better life in the richercountries of the world economy. The push and pull of globalcapitalism accounts for the unprecedented migration ofpeople around the world (see Table 5.1), whether from thecountryside to small and large cities in the developing worldor in pursuit of affluence and an easier life in rich countriessuch as Canada, the United States, France, and Germany.

United States 38 354 709

Russian Federation 12 079 626

Germany 10 143 626

France 6 471 029

Saudi Arabia 6 360 730

Canada 6 105 722

India 5 700 147

United Kingdom 5 408 118

Spain 4 790 074

Australia 4 097 204

Top 10 Total 99 510 985

World 190 633 564

Note: As countries collect statistics on immigrants in varying ways,

it is often difficult to harmonize data across countries; differences

in counting deeply affect rank orders.

Source: United Nations, Trends in Total Migrant Stock: The 2005 Revision,data in digital form, 2006. Available at http://esa.un.org/migration/index.asp?panel=1

TABLE 5.1 Top 10 Countries with the LargestNumber of International Migrants (in thousands, 2005)

Number of Immigrants

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 96


With few transferable skills, many new immigrants,especially women, find employment as domestics or along-side national workers in “soft” sectors such as the garmentindustry. In these and similar precarious employmentoptions, women’s paid work often means accepting lowerpay, increasing workloads both at work and at home, andmore stress. In the private sector, for example, a preponder-ant number of women work in less skilled jobs in the gar-ment industry, while in the public and not-for-profit sectorswomen form the largest share of health care professionalssuch as nurses, home care, and personal support workers.

The textile and garment industries were among the firstindustries to be globalized. United Colors of Benetton, or theBenneton Group, an Italian family-run clothing multina-tional, began operations in the mid 1960s. Today, the com-pany is known not only for its images of beautiful faces andyouth from around the world, but also for its ability to com-municate through music, theatre, photography, publishing,and the internet. Benetton is the precursor to companiessuch as Gap and Old Navy.

The garment industry in Canada—be it along SpadinaAvenue in Toronto or in the Chabanel District of Montreal—experienced massive changes under the force of globaliza-tion. Consider the Exchange District in Winnipeg, now adesignated historic site, or the rapid demise of Mr. Jax inVancouver, and the dramatic effects of globalization are obvi-ous. The existing industry in Montreal and Toronto faceshard times in a global economic world. Employment inthe clothing sector in Quebec fell from 57 000 in 2003 to30 000 in 2005—a massive change in a short period oftime. Most of those affected were women; many were recentimmigrants.

Offshore textile and garment manufacturing is certainlyglobal in scope. In many Asian countries, young girls arelured to tax-free “factory cities,” called “export processingzones,” by the promise of good jobs manufacturing prod-ucts for export. Among the hazards they are confronted withare forced overtime, stifling hot factories with poor ventila-tion, forced pregnancy tests, sexual violence, and uncleandrinking water.

Job loss in Canada and hazardous offshore working con-ditions tell only half the story. What happens when womenreturn home? Who does the housework? What happens iftheir husband or partner loses his job? During the recentAsian economic crisis, the Korean government called uponwomen to “get your husband energized” if he had lost hisjob, and help offset the impact of the economic crisis on menwho, as government ads pointed out, were subject to depres-sion and possible suicide.

Education is critical in order for women in Canada andthe rest of the world to compete as equals in the professionalworld and earn a decent income of their own. However, inCanada, student debt has skyrocketed. On average, femalegraduates earn less than their male counterparts, resultingin longer debt repayment periods. Those without a univer-sity education are particularly disadvantaged. When the

Canadian government eliminated the National Training Actin 1996, which included training programs geared towardwomen, good paying jobs for women in non-traditional sec-tors became even harder to get.

University education and skills development remain sig-nificant factors for achieving equity in the workplace, bothin Canada and elsewhere around the world.

GLOBALIZATION: THE ISSUESMore important than the movement of people around theworld has been the movement of goods, services, and capi-tal. Since 1950, the volume of world trade has increasedtwentyfold, and the flow of direct investment doubled from$468 billion in 1997 to $827 billion in 1999. Subsidiariesof transnational corporations, such as Toyota’s CAMIAutomotive plant in Ingersoll, Ontario, or the slew of Wal-Marts in almost every province are examples of directinvestment.

Globalization involves more than the building of largemanufacturing and retail businesses controlled outside thecommunity or country; it often means the disappearance oflocal enterprises, restaurants, and entertainment venues infavour of branch plants of foreign-based transnational cor-porations. It can even affect the choices of food and bever-ages offered at your university. Chances are that Sodexho andPepsi-Cola have a monopoly at your school. As such, glob-alization impacts the world’s environment, national and localcultures, national and local governments, the physical well-being of individuals, and human rights.

Globalization has both advocates and detractors. Its pro-ponents argue that poor countries and their citizens benefiteconomically from increased employment opportunities andrising standards of living. In order to benefit, it is argued,nations must open their borders to international trade. Tariffsand other barriers to the “free” movement of capital, goods,and services must be eliminated. International organizationssuch as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund(IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO) (formerlythe General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)) fostera climate of trade and investment liberalization across theglobe. They maintain that globalization will generate a morelevel playing field on which countries can compete for cap-ital and labour, thereby decreasing worldwide inequalities ofwealth and poverty.

Opponents of globalization point to the benefits amassedby transnational corporations such as Time Warner, ExxonMobil, AT&T, Johnson & Johnson, or Sony Corporation atthe expense of local enterprises, local cultures, and ordinarypeople. They contend that increased inequalities of wealth,power, and privilege accrue at the expense of the lessdeveloped and poorer regions of the world. Democracy,human rights, and labour rights are said to be underminedby institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank.

In July 1944, delegates from 44 nations gathered at theUnited Nations Monetary and Financial Conference in

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 97

Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. They reached an agree-ment, known as the Bretton Woods Agreement, that createdtwo international institutions: the International Bank forReconstruction and Development, known today as theWorld Bank, and the IMF.

WORLD BANK With considerable financial power, the WorldBank shapes development policies across Africa, LatinAmerica, Asia, and Eastern Europe. Its self-proclaimed pri-mary objective is to eradicate poverty, yet evidence suggeststhat World Bank programs often increase social inequalitiesand cause environmental destruction.

IMF The IMF was founded in 1944 as a result of the finan-cial turmoil of the Great Depression of the 1930s and thedevastation caused by World War II. The organization pro-vided financial stability in the decades following the SecondWorld War in order to increase world trade. Today, the IMFhas a membership of 184 countries and has intervened insuch financial crises as the 1995 crash of the Mexican pesoand the 1997/98 East Asian financial crisis. IMF policies havebeen criticized for increasing poverty and suffering amongordinary citizens while shielding multinational corporationsand their backers in wealthy countries.

WTO Growing out of the Uruguay Round of GATT tradetalks (1986 to 1994), the WTO was founded in January1995 as an international body of 146 member countrieswhose purpose, like the GATT, is to promote free trade.Unlike the GATT, WTO decisions are absolute and everymember must abide by its rulings. As such, it has becomeclosely associated with globalization.

GATT The GATT was first signed in 1947 as a UnitedNations treaty, rather than an organization. The agreementwas designed to provide an international forum to encour-age free trade between member states.

GLOBALIZATION, INEQUALITY, AND DEVELOPMENTUntil recently, a simple model consisting of First, Second, andThird Worlds was used to depict global stratification. “FirstWorld” referred to industrialized capitalist nations, “SecondWorld” to communist nations, and “Third World” to anynation that did not fit into the first two categories. After thecollapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, these terms became out-dated. In addition, although “first,” “second,” and “third” didnot mean “best,” “second best,” and “worst,” they sounded likeit. An alternative classification now in use—developed, devel-oping, and undeveloped nations—has the same drawback. Byreferring to ourselves as “developed,” it sounds as though weare mature and the “undeveloped” nations lack our desirabletrait. Consequently, we employ more neutral descriptiveterms: most industrialized, industrializing, and least industrial-ized nations.

Such descriptions are used to depict on a global levelthree primary dimensions: property, power, and prestige.The most industrialized nations have greater property(wealth), power (they get their way in internationalrelations), and prestige—rightly or wrongly, they are lookedup to as world leaders with something to contribute tohumanity. As illustrated in Figure 5.2, internationally, morethan 1.2 billion people—or one in five—survive on less thanU.S.$1 a day (United Nations, 2003, p. 5). The past fewdecades have seen some improvements in the least industri-alized countries: life expectancy increased by eight years andliteracy rates improved dramatically (United Nations, 2003,p. 2). However, during the 1990s, average per capita incomegrowth was less than 3 percent in 125 countries, and actu-ally declined in 54 of them (United Nations, 2003, p. 3). Thepoorest countries face critical, life-threatening crises: increas-ing poverty, food shortages, and increased rates of hunger.

To further understand the tremendous differencesbetween the richest and poorest people in the world, considerincome share. In the first years of the twentieth century, therichest 1 percent of people received income equal to 57 per-cent of the world’s poorest people. Further, the income of theworld’s richest 10 percent of the population was 127.7 timesthat of the poorest 10 percent (Centre for Social Justice, 2001;United Nations, 2001). The three families sketched in thechapter’s opening vignette provide insight into the far-reaching effects of globalization on citizens around the world,as does the following Thinking Critically about SocialControversy box on page xxx on children as prey.

Over the past two centuries, the gap between the richestand poorest countries has grown tremendously. In 1820, therichest countries were roughly three times richer than thepoorest, based on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.This ratio rose to 15 times by 1950 and to 19 times by 1998(Lee, 2002). As shown in Table 5.2, the world’s richest


TABLE 5.2 Share of the Total GDP of theWorld’s People: Richest 20 Percentversus Poorest 20 Percent

Year Share of Top 20% Compared to Bottom 20%

1960 30x

1970 32x

1980 45x

1989 59x

1997 74x

Note: In 1997, the top 20 percent received 74 times the income

of the bottom 20 percent.

Source: Based on “The Global Divide: Inequality in the World Economy” byMarc Lee, 2002, Behind the Numbers: Economic Facts, Figures and Analysis, 4,No. 2. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Reproduced fromUnited National Development Program, Human Development Report 1999.New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 36–37.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 98


The Most Industrialized Nations

NationIncome per

PersonLuxembourgUnited StatesNorwaySwitzerlandIrelandIcelandAustriaDenmarkHong Kong(a part of China)BelgiumUnited KingdomNetherlandsCanadaSwedenJapanFinlandFranceAustraliaGermanyItalySingaporeTaiwanIsraelNew Zealand

$58,900$39,820$38,680$35,660$32,930$31,900$31,800$31,770

$31,560$31,530$31,430$31,360$30,760$29,880$29,810$29,800$29,460$29,340$28,170$28,020$27,370$25,300$23,770$22,260

123456789

101112131415161718192021222324

SpainGreeceSloveniaKorea, SouthPortugalCzech RepublicHungarySlovakiaSaudi ArabiaEstoniaPolandLithuaniaArgentinaCroatiaLatviaSouth AfricaChileMalaysiaRussiaMexicoCosta RicaUruguayRomaniaBrazilBulgariaThailandBosniaColombiaVenezuela

2526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253

$24,750$22,230$20,830$20,530$19,240$18,420$15,800$14,480$13,810$13,630$12,730$12,690$12,530$11,920$11,820$10,960$10,610$9,720$9,680$9,640$9,220$9,030$8,330$7,940$7,940$7,930$7,230$6,940$5,830

The Industrializing Nations

NationIncome per

Person

The Least Industrialized Nations

NationIncome per

Person NationIncome per

Person

Botswana3

TurkeyNamibiaTunisiaBelarusKazakhstanDominicanRepublicPanamaMacedoniaBelizeUkraineAlgeriaChinaGabonTurkmenistanSwaziland

$9,580$7,720$7,520$7,430$6,970$6,930

$6,860$6,730$6,560$6,500$6,330$6,320$5,890$5,700$5,700$5,650

54555657585960

616263646566676869

LebanonPeruAlbaniaPhilippinesEl SalvadorParaguayJordanSurinameGuatemalaMoroccoSri LankaEgyptArmeniaJamaicaAzerbaijanGuyanaEcuador

$5,550$5,400$5,070$4,950$4,890$4,820$4,770$4,300$4,260$4,250$4,210$4,200$4,160$3,950$3,810$3,800$3,770

7071727374757677787980818283848586

2

13

44

52

93

96

89

45

74

60

61

63

71

75

78

8577

83

91118

86

53

48

46

41

37

6

FIGURE 5.2 Global Stratification: Income of the World’s Nations

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 99


The Oil-Rich Nations

NationIncome per

Person

United ArabEmiratesQatarKuwaitBahrainOmanIranIraq2

$24,090

$23,200$21,610$19,200$14,680$7,530$2,100

149

150151152153154155

The Least Industrialized Nations

NationIncome per




Person

SyriaIndonesiaNicaraguaIndiaCubaGeorgiaHondurasEquatorialGuineaVietnamBoliviaCambodiaPapua-NewGuineaGhanaPakistanGuinea

8788899091929394

95969798

99100101

$3,500$3,480$3,480$3,120$3,000$2,900$2,760

$2,700$2,700$2,600$2,310

$2,280$2,220$2,170$2,160

102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118

CameroonMauritaniaZimbabweBangladeshMoldovaAngolaMongoliaGambiaLaosKrygyzstanUzbekistanSudanBurmaKorea, NorthSenegalTogoHaiti

$2,120$2,050$2,040$1,970$1,950$1,930$1,900$1,890$1,880$1,860$1,860$1,810$1,700$1,700$1,660$1,510$1,500

119120121122123124125126127128129130

131132133134

NepalCote d’IvoireUgandaBhutanChadDjiboutiRwandaBurkina FasoMozambiqueTajikistanKenyaCentral AfricanRepublicBeninNigeriaEritreaMali

$1,480$1,470$1,450$1,400$1,340$1,300$1,240$1,170$1,170$1,160$1,130

$1,100$1,090

$970$960$950

135136137138139140141142143

144145146147148

ZambiaMadagascarYemenAfghanistanNigerEthiopiaCongoGuinea-BissauCongo, DemocraticRepublicTanzaniaBurundiMalawiSomaliaSierra Leone

$890$840$810$800$780$750$740$690

$680$670$660$630$600$550

1

4

3

10

8

7

125 19

16

17

14

11

202529 26

3031

51

35

43

38

58

39

55

36

47

32

34

27

57 70

94

40

54

102

105

110114

115

97

119

108

121

122

107

130

128

138

129

131126

133

124147

125

123

136

132

127

134

135

139

142

143

141

144

148 140

146

113

120

117

116 73

76 66

68

64

81

79

87

88

8492

82

106

72

80

49

59

111112

90

98

95101

103

109

100

67

65

56

104

99

62

23

15

229

28

50

4242

21

15215033

154

153

155

149

137

151

18

24

69

145

1Income is a country’s purchasing power parity based on its per capita gross domestic product measured in U.S. dollars. Since some totals vary widely from year toyear, they must be taken as approximate. 2Iraq’s oil has been disrupted by war. 3Botswana’s relative wealth is based on its diamond mines.

Sources: By the author. Based on Statistical Abstract of the United States 2007: Table 1324, with a few missing countries taken from the CIA’s latest World Factbook.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 100


TH INK ING CR IT ICALLY ABOUT SOCIAL CONTROVERSYOpen Season: Children as Prey

In Phnom Penh, Cambodia, the city dump is home to

many people, and a highly developed social

organization has emerged. Pictured here, after garbage

has been delivered by truck, people stream around it,

struggling to be the first to discover something of value.

Workers use metal picks, like the one this child is

holding, to sift through the trash. Note that children

work alongside adults.

The “respectable” classes see themas nothing but trouble. They hurt busi-ness, for customers feel uncomfortableor intimidated when they see a group ofbegging children clustered in front ofstores. Some shoplift; others dare to sellitems in competition with local shops.With no social institutions to care forthese children, some see killing them asa solution. As Huggins notes, murdersends a clear message, especially ifaccompanied by ritual torture—pullingout eyes, ripping open chests, cuttingoff genitals, raping girls, and burningvictims’ bodies.

The plight of these Brazilian childrenis replicated around the globe.Worldwide, 1.2 billion persons live on adollar a day or less. Tens of millions ofchildren are on the streets, locked outof schools because their parents cannotafford school fees. And more than a mil-lion children die each year from diarrheabecause they do not have access to cleandrinking water (Mokhiber & Weissman,2002).

In some societies, even the law failsto provide adequate protection. InChina, children younger than 16 are for-bidden from working, but an estimated10 million school-age children, usuallygirls and often from rural areas, are

assemblers in manufacturing plants orwork illegally in any number of otheractivities. Some of these children havebeen kidnapped. “Children, some asyoung as four, roam China’s relativelyprosperous coastal cities, begging onthe streets or selling roses deep into thenight, apparently victims of schemes thatuse youngsters as bait” (Ni, 2005). Insome cases, “rural schools have con-tracted out entire classes of students towork in urban factories, supposedly tohelp defray school costs” (Ni, 2005). Andchild labourers face appallingly danger-ous, unhealthy, and dirty working con-ditions, including 12-hour shifts with notime off. For these girls, there are noalternatives. They drop out of schoolbecause their families cannot affordtuition.

For Your ConsiderationCan the most industrialized nations doanything about this situation? Or arethey partially responsible? Are theseproblems “internal” affairs that shouldbe left to the Brazilians or Chinese tohandle as they wish? Or are they theresult of globalization? Can you do any-thing to help?

Sociologist Martha Huggins (1993)reports that in Brazilian slums, povertyis so deep that children and adults swarmover garbage dumps searching forenough decaying food to keep themalive. To add insult to injury, the ownersof these dumps hire armed guards tokeep the poor out—so they can sell thegarbage for pig food. Even more shock-ing, poor children are systematicallykilled. Every year, Brazilian police anddeath squads murder close to 2000 chil-dren. Some associations of shop ownersgo so far as to put hit men on retainersand auction victims off to the lowest bid-der. The going rate is half a month’ssalary—figured at the low rate of aBrazilian minimum wage.

A life of slavery is bad enough—butdeath squads for children? To understand,we must recognize Brazil’s long history ofviolence. Brazil has an extremely high rateof poverty, only a small middle class, andis controlled by a small group of familieswho, under a veneer of democracy, makethe country’s major decisions. Hordes ofhomeless children, with no schools or jobsto attend, roam the streets. To survive,they wash windshields, shine shoes, beg,and steal. These children, part of whatare known as the “dangerous classes,”threaten the status quo.

This controversy is also a peerScholar assignment in .

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 101


people’s share of total GDP has skyrocketed over the past40 years.

GDP measures the dollar value of all final goods andservices produced within the borders of a country such asCanada or the United States in a given year. GDP must bedistinguished from GNP, or Gross National Product, whichdoes not include goods and services produced by foreign pro-ducers but does include the dollar value of goods and serv-ices produced by all Canadian-owned firms operating inforeign countries. GDP is the preferred measure of whetheran economy is expanding or contracting used by economistsand other social scientists.

According to the U.S. Institute for Policy Studies, therewere 497 billionaires worldwide in 2001, with a combinedwealth of $1.54 trillion, a figure that exceeded the combinedGNPs of all the nations of sub-Saharan Africa or those of theoil-rich regions of the Middle East or North Africa. Moreover,the billionaires’ combined wealth was “greater than the com-bined incomes of the poorest half of all of humanity” (IPS,quoted in Mokhiber & Weissman, 2002).

Modifying the ModelThe classification of nations into the most industrialized,industrializing, and least industrialized is helpful in that itpinpoints gross differences among them. But it also presentsproblems. How much industrialization does a nation requirein order to be classified as “most industrialized” or “indus-trializing”? Several nations have become “postindustrial.”Does this new stage require a separate classification? The oil-rich nations of the Middle East are not industrialized, but byproviding the oil and gasoline that fuel the machinery of themost industrialized nations, they have become immenselywealthy. Consequently, to classify them simply as “leastindustrialized” glosses over significant distinctions, such astheir modern hospitals, extensive prenatal care, pure watersystems, abundant food and shelter, high literacy, and com-puterized banking.

Kuwait, on whose behalf the United States and othermost industrialized nations fought Iraq in the First Gulf War,is an excellent example of the difficulties posed by this clas-sification system. Kuwait is so wealthy that almost none ofits citizens are employed. The government simply pays eachresident a generous annual salary. Migrant workers frompoor nations do most of the onerous chores of daily life,while highly skilled workers from the most industrializednations run the specialized systems that keep Kuwait’s econ-omy going—and, on occasion, fight its wars. Table 5.3reflects this significant distinction.

SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF GLOBALAND SOCIAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTHow did the world come to be divided into such distinctworlds of development? The obvious answer is that thepoorer nations have fewer resources than the richer ones. As

with so many other “obvious” answers, however, this one,too, falls short, for many of the industrializing and leastindustrialized nations are rich in natural resources, while oneof the most industrialized nations, Japan, has few. Four com-peting theories explain how some countries developed fasterthan others and how globalization came about.

Imperialism and ColonizationThe first theory suggests that the first European nations toindustrialize got a jump on the rest of the world. Beginningin Great Britain about 1750, industrialization spreadthroughout Western Europe. Powerful new technology pro-duced great wealth, resulting in surplus capital. Accordingto economist John Hobson (1858–1940), the industrializednations lacked enough consumers to make it profitable toinvest all excess capital at home. Consequently, businessleaders persuaded their governments to embark on imper-ialism, to take over other countries so they could expandtheir markets and gain access to cheap raw materials.

Backed by the powerful armaments developed by theirnew technology, the industrialized nations found easy preyelsewhere (Harrison, 1993). The result was colonization,where more powerful nations made colonies out of weakerones. After invading and subduing a country, colonizers lefta controlling force to exploit its labour and natural resources.At one point, there was virtually a free-for-all amongEuropean industrialized nations as they rushed to divide thecontinent of Africa. As Europe sliced it into pieces, even tinyBelgium got in the act and acquired the Congo—a country75 times its own size. While the powerful European nationsplanted national flags in a colony and sent representatives todirectly run the government, the United States, after it indus-trialized, usually chose to plant corporate flags in a colonyand let corporations dominate the territory’s government.Central and South America are prime examples of U.S.economic imperialism. No matter the form, whether benevo-lent or harsh, the purpose was the same—to exploit anothernation’s people and resources for the benefit of a “mother”country.

Western imperialism and colonization shaped the leastindustrialized nations (Martin, 1994). In some instances, themost industrialized nations were so powerful that to dividetheir spoils, they drew lines across a map, creating new stateswithout regard for tribal or cultural considerations (Kennedy,

TABLE 5.3 An Alternative Model of the GlobalEconomy

Four Worlds of Development

1. Most industrialized nations

2. Industrializing nations

3. Least industrialized nations

4. Oil-rich, non-industrialized nations

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 102


1993). Britain and France followed this policy in NorthAfrica and parts of the Middle East, which explains why thenational boundaries of Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, andother nations are so straight.

World System TheorySociologist Immanuel Wallerstein (1974, 1979, 1984, 1990)proposed a world system theory. Since the 1500s,Wallerstein argued, economic, political, social, and culturalinteractions have grown between nations. Today, these linksare so great that they tie most of the world’s countriestogether. At the beginning of the expansion of capitalism fromits European origins, Wallerstein identified four groups ofinterconnected nations. The first group is comprised of thecore nations, those that first embraced capitalism. Theseregions (Britain, France, Holland, and later Germany) grewrich and powerful. The second group—the nations aroundthe Mediterranean—Wallerstein called the semiperiphery.Their economies stagnated as a result of their dependence ontrade with the core nations. The third group, the periphery,or fringe, consists of the eastern European countries. Becausethey were primarily limited to selling cash crops to the corenations, their economies developed even less. The fourthgroup, the external area, includes most of Africa and Asia.These nations were left out of the development of capitalismand had few economic connections with the core nations.

Capitalism’s relentless expansion gave birth to acapitalist world economy, dominated by the most indus-trialized nations. This economy is so all-encompassing thattoday, no single region is outside the reach of global capital-ism. All the nations of the world can be classified as core,semiperiphery, or periphery.

CANADA AS A SEMIPERIPHERAL COUNTRY At a time whenmost sociologists and political economists argued that Canadawas a developed core nation, one of the authors of this text,

a graduate student of Immanuel Wallerstein in the mid 1970s,tackled the question of whether this was true or whetherCanada displayed the characteristics of a semiperipheralcountry. In an article entitled “Rich but Semiperipheral:Canada’s Ambiguous Position in the World Economy,” DanGlenday (1989) presented evidence for Canada as a semipe-ripheral nation. Canada’s major economic sectors, with theexception of banking, insurance, and transportation, are heav-ily foreign owned and/or controlled. Canada ships its naturalresources to the U.S., Japan, and China, but operates its owndirect investment outlets in the Caribbean and in otherperipheral countries of the world economy.

Why was this important? Semiperipheral countries,according to Wallerstein, possess unique characteristics.First, they act like core countries when trading with theperiphery, but appear to behave as peripheral nations whenengaged in economic relations with core regions.Semiperipheral nations also display direct and immediateinterest in the control of the market at both internal andinternational levels (1989: p. 238). Clearly, from the pointof view of global economic relations, Canada behaved andstill behaves like a semiperipheral country.

Glenday argues that Canada’s state policies, such as theFree Trade Agreement and, later, the North American FreeTrade Agreement, were critical in defining our status in theworld economy. Would these initiatives raise Canada’s statusin the world economy and thereby increase economic andsocial advantages for all Canadians? Or would they pushCanada downward, distancing it from the core countries, and,as a result, negatively impact our economic and social future?

Recently, Glenday (2009) offered an assessment of theseand other state policies on Canada’s position in the worldeconomy. While Canada remains defined as a rich nation, weare sliding downward in the world economy. How doesCanada’s descent impact jobs, social choices, and life chancesfor this and future generations?

Inside a maquiladora in Matamoros, Mexico. The

steering wheels are for North American auto makers.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 103

Developed core countries offer their citizens access tomany economic, social, medical, and cultural advantages,especially when compared to poorer peripheral countries. Inrelation to semiperipheral countries such as Canada, corecountries such as France, Germany, Great Britain, and Japanare better off economically, socially, and culturally. Canada’sgood fortune lies in our rich endowment of naturalresources, from oil and gas to gold and diamonds. Our nat-ural resources are exported to other countries, where theyare processed and re-sold in the global marketplace, expand-ing employment, social choices, and life chances in thoseregions. Today, Canadians in Alberta and Saskatchewan ben-efit from the export of oil and natural gas. Tomorrow,Canadians in Newfoundland and Nova Scotia will likely ben-efit from the discovery and exploitation of offshore naturalresources. Instead of unifying the country, the uneven dis-tribution of natural resources is transforming Canada into apatchwork of natural resource “sheikdoms.” How long willour good fortune last? On what other industries is our econ-omy being built? What will the extent of social choices befor this and future generations of Canadians? These ques-tions must be addressed and openly debated.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE NEWS As noted atthe beginning of the chapter, the extensive movement of cap-ital, technology, people, and ideas between nations that wasushered in by the expansion of capitalism is called globali-zation (Kanter, 1997b). Although globalization has beenunder way for several hundred years, today’s new forms ofcommunication and transportation have greatly intensifiedthe process.

Our extensive interconnection has been made possiblein part by the existence of cable news. Satellite, fibre-optic,and other technologies bring events that are happeningin remote parts of the world into our living rooms.Communications technology has made the world smaller,with international outlets such as CNN, Fox News, the BBC,and Al Jazeera creating a “global news village” in which thosewith the means can watch stories from around the world.People can now claim certain commonalities on which tobase a shared experience, even though they live in very dif-ferent cultures and nations.

Conversely, much technology is owned and controlled bya small group of companies and as a result has made theworld more divisive—the heavy influence of “Americanized”news underscores the disparity between the United States andthe rest of the world. Instead of serving to unite the “globalnews village,” the news often inserts a wedge between civi-lizations. Deep divisions about how to interpret what is hap-pening in the world are reproduced in news presentationsworldwide. All societies today, no matter where they are, arepart of a global social system with built-in contradictions.

Dependency TheoryThe third theory is sometimes difficult to distinguish fromworld system theory. Dependency theory stresses how the

least industrialized nations became dependent on the mostindustrialized nations (Cardoso, 1972; Furtado, 1984).According to dependency theory, the first nations to indus-trialize turned other nations into plantations and mines, har-vesting or extracting whatever they needed to meet theirgrowing appetite for raw materials and exotic foods. As aresult, many of the least industrialized nations began to spe-cialize in single cash crops. Brazil became a coffee plantationfor the most industrialized nations. Nicaragua and otherCentral American countries specialized in bananas (hence theterm “banana republic”). Chile became the primary source oftin, and Zaire (then the Belgian Congo) was transformed intoa rubber plantation. Nations in the Middle East were turnedinto gigantic oil wells. A major point of dependency theoryis that the domination of the least industrialized nations ren-dered them unable to develop independent economies.

There is substantial evidence that as capital has movedaround the world, poverty has increased and quality of lifefor millions of people has deteriorated. The process of glob-alization has accelerated economic competition among coun-tries. To compete with one another in world markets, manynations have lowered wages, eliminated worker support pro-grams and environmental protection, decreased socialspending, and dismantled public health care and otheressential services (Brecher & Costello, 1998; McNally, 2002).Sociologists such as James Petras and Henry Veltmeyer(2001) argue that globalization is a modern form of imperi-alism that advances the interests of the powerful and privi-leged and neither enhances quality of life nor extends socialjustice to ordinary people.

Culture of PovertyAn entirely different explanation of global poverty was pro-posed by economist John Kenneth Galbraith (1979), whocontends that the least industrialized nations were held backby their own cultures. Building on the ideas of anthropolo-gist Oscar Lewis (1966a, 1966b), Galbraith argued that somenations are crippled by a culture of poverty, a way of life thatperpetuates poverty from one generation to the next. Most ofthe world’s poor live in rural areas, where they barely eke outa living from the land. Their marginal life offers little roomfor error or risk, so they tend to stick closely to tried-and-true,traditional ways, according to Galbraith. Experimenting withnew farming or manufacturing techniques is threatening,because if they fail, the result could be hunger or death. Theirreligion also reinforces traditionalism, for it teaches fatalism,the acceptance of one’s lot in life as God’s will.

Evaluating the TheoriesMost sociologists prefer imperialism, world system theory,and dependency theory to Galbraith’s culture of povertytheory, given that the latter places blame on the victim—thepoor nations themselves. It faults the characteristics of poornations rather than international arrangements that benefitthe most industrialized nations at their expense. But even


05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 104


taken together, these theories yield only part of the picture,as becomes evident from the example of Japan. After WorldWar II, with a religion that stressed fatalism and two majorcities destroyed by atomic bombs, Japan—through strippedof its colonies—became an economic powerhouse thatturned the Western world on its head. Looking at detailedsocio-historical national studies examining the way in whichculture, political structure, and class relations affect globaleconomic positioning may provide us with the clearestunderstanding of globalization, inequality, and development.

Focus QuestionWhich theory or theories do you think most adequatelyexplain globalization?

THE STRUCTURES OF GLOBALIZATIONRegardless of how globalization developed, why do the samecountries remain rich year after year, while the rest stay poor?Let’s look at how world inequality is maintained by some ofthe structures of globalization.

NeocolonialismSociologist Michael Harrington (1977) argued that nine-teenth century colonialism was replaced by twentieth cen-tury neocolonialism. When World War II changed publicsentiment about sending soldiers and colonists to weakercountries, the most industrialized nations turned to inter-national markets as a way of controlling the least industrial-ized nations. These powerful nations determine how muchthey will pay for tin from Bolivia, copper from Peru, coffeefrom Brazil, and so forth. They also move hazardous indus-tries into the least industrialized nations.

As many of us learn, falling behind on a debt oftenmeans that we find ourselves dangling at the end of a stringpulled by our creditor. The same is true for neocolonialism.Selling weapons and other manufactured goods to the leastindustrialized nations on credit turns those countries intoeternal debtors. The capital they need to develop their ownindustries goes instead to debt, ever bloated with mountinginterest. As debtors, these nations are also vulnerable to trad-ing terms dictated by the agents of globalization, such as theIMF and World Bank (Tordoff, 1992; Carrington, 1993).

Thus, although the least industrialized nations have theirown governments—whether elected or dictatorships—theyremain almost as dependent on the most industrializednations as they were when those nations occupied them.

Transnational CorporationsTransnational or multinational corporations, companiesthat operate across many national boundaries, also helpmaintain the global dominance of the most industrializednations. In some cases, multinational corporations directlyexploit the least industrialized nations. A prime example isthe United Fruit Company, which controlled national and

local politics in Central America for decades, running thesenations as fiefdoms for the company’s own profit while theU.S. Marines waited in the wings in case the company’s inter-ests needed to be backed up. Most commonly, however,transnational corporations help maintain globalization sim-ply by doing business. A single transnational may do miningin several countries, manufacturing in many others, and runtransportation and marketing networks around the globe. Nomatter where profits are made or where they are reinvested,the primary beneficiaries are the most industrialized nations,and especially the one in which the multinational corpora-tion has its world headquarters. As Michael Harrington(1977) stressed, the real profits are made in processing theproducts and in controlling their distribution—profits thatare withheld from the least industrialized nations. For moreon multinational corporations, see Chapter 11.

Transnational corporations try to work closely with theelite of the least industrialized nations (Lipton, 1979;Waldman, 1995a; Sklair, 2001). Those elite, who live asophisticated upper-class life in the major cities of their homecountries, send their children to Oxford, the Sorbonne,McGill, or Harvard to be educated. Multinational corpora-tions funnel investments to this small circle of power, whosemembers favour projects such as building laboratories andcomputer centres in capital cities, projects that do not helpthe vast majority of people living in poor, remote villageseking out a meagre living on small plots of land.

The end result is an informal partnership betweentransnational corporations and the elite of the least industri-alized nations. The elite benefit by receiving subsidies (orpayoffs); the corporations gain access to the countries’ rawmaterials, labour, and market. Both benefit through politicalstability, necessary to keep the partnership alive.

This is not the full story, however. Transnational corpo-rations also play a role in changing the process of develop-ment in some countries, such as in India and China. This isan unintentional by-product of their worldwide search forcheap resources and labour. By moving manufacturing fromthe most industrialized nations with high labour costs to theleast industrialized nations with low labour costs, they notonly exploit cheap labour, but, in some cases, also bringprosperity to certain regions within those nations. Althoughworkers in the least industrialized nations are paid a pit-tance, it is more than they can earn elsewhere. With new fac-tories come opportunities to develop new skills and a capitalbase. This does not occur in all nations, but the Pacific Rimnations, nicknamed the “Asian tigers,” are remarkable. Theyhave developed such a strong capital base that they havebegun to rival the older capitalist nations.

Technology and the Maintenance of Global DominationThe race between the most and least industrialized nations todevelop and apply new information technologies can be com-pared to a marathon runner competing against a one-legged

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 105

man. The vast profits amassed by multinational corporationsallow the most industrialized nations to invest huge sums inthe latest technology. Wal-Mart, along with a few restaurantchains, controls 54 percent of the direct sales market inMexico, with 687 stores in 71 cities (Ribeiro, 2005).Multinationals often use technologies to track their customers’purchases and streamline production processes in order toshave what sometimes amounts to only a fraction of a centoff costs. Gillette spent $100 million to adjust its output “onan hourly basis” (Zachary, 1995). Many least industrializednations would greatly benefit from a $100 million investmentin their national economy, much less to fine-tune productionin a single organization. In short, new technologies accrueeven more advantages for the most industrialized nations.

ANTI-GLOBALIZATIONJosé Bové is considered by many to be an importantrepresentative of the anti-globalization movement. He iswidely known for campaigning against genetically modifiedcrops and has led protests in Brazil and France. His mostpublicized protest was directed at the cheese used byMcDonald’s restaurants, which he viewed as the most effec-tive way to protest U.S. trade restrictions against locallymade Rocquefort cheese. On August 12, 1999, Bové led agroup known as the Peasant Confederation to vandalize aMacdonald’s restaurant in Millau, France. He was sentencedto three months in prison and, together with nine others,became known as the Millau 10. (BBC, February 15, 2001)

Targeting the negative practices of transnational corpo-rations is one major strategy of the anti-globalization move-ment. Such protests usually focus on the following:

■ aim for the maximization of profits

■ locate where the salaries are lowest

■ employ children and women in factories

■ destroy the environment through production

■ obliterate cultural identities

■ amass greater power than many nation states

A second target of anti-globalization protestors isinternational organizations such as the World Bank, theInternational Monetary Fund, and the World TradeOrganization, whose objective is to promote policies of freetrade and balanced state budgets. According to the move-ment, such policies put an intolerable weight on the shoul-ders of the poor countries by increasing debt loads andpushing for reductions in social expenditures. Often, pro-testers request that rich countries “forgive” the debts owedto them by poorer nations.

World Social ForumFounded in 2001 in Porto Alegre, Brazil, the World SocialForum (WSF) is not an organization or formal group; rather,it uses the internet as an “open space” to bring together social

movements, organizations, NGOs, and individuals to discussalternatives to globalization. In its own words, the WSF seeksto bring together all those who oppose “neo-liberal global-ization” and “imperialism in all its forms.” It meets in Januaryof every year in order to counterbalance the discussions ofthe World Economic Forum, which is a Geneva-based foun-dation whose annual meetings in Davos, Switzerland, bringtogether leaders of the most powerful economic organizations(companies with annual earnings over $1 billion), nationalpolitical leaders (presidents, prime ministers, and others),and selected intellectuals.

Globalization, Forced Child Labour, and SlaveryBefore attending university, many young Canadians workedpart-time. However, in all provinces and territories, there areseveral laws prohibiting employers from hiring a young per-son for full-time work (see Chapter 11 for a description of theCanadian labour market and labour laws). The most impor-tant restriction is compulsory school attendance. In every


Eight-year-old Mahashury is a bonded laborer who was exchanged

by her parents for a 2000 rupee loan (about $14). To repay the loan,

Mahashury must do construction work for a year. She will receive one

meal a day and a single set of clothing for the year. Because this

centuries-old practice is now illegal, the master bribes Indian officials,

who inform him when they are going to inspect the construction site.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 106


province, a young person must attend school until gradua-tion from high school or until she/he reaches the age of 18(Labour Law Analysis, International and IntergovernmentalLabour Affairs, Labour Program, Human Resources and SocialDevelopment Canada, October 15, 2006; www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/spila/clli/eslc/minage(e).pdf). At least five Canadianprovinces allow children under the age of 14 to work withpermission from their parents and the Director ofEmployment Standards (www.cbc.ca/childlabour/ilo.html).

The International Labour Organization, a United Nationsagency, has established conventions regarding child labour.Convention 138 deals with the minimum age of workingand recommends the minimum age of employment of anykind to 15. Convention 182 deals with dangerous workenvironments for children. On June 22, 2008, Canadasigned on to Convention 182 but not Convention 138 (http://webfusion.ilo.org/public/db/standards/normes/appl/appl-ratif8conv.cfm?Lang=EN).

THINK ING CR IT ICALLY ABOUT SOCIAL CONTROVERSY

Poverty: A Global Warning

Poverty and growing social inequality arenot simply local problems; they haveglobal dimensions. Current estimates sug-gest that one in five people in the worldlive on less than $1 per day and 8 millionpeople die each year as a result of poverty(Williams, 2004; Sachs, 2005). Almost11 million children die each year beforethe age of five in developing countriesand almost half of their deaths are frompreventable causes such as diarrhea,measles, malaria, and acute respiratoryinfection (“Bid to Cut Mortality Rate,”2005). While the industrial countries havelong been aware of global inequalities,economic globalization—along with theincreasing prominence of global organi-zations such as the World TradeOrganization (WTO), the World Bank, andthe International Monetary Fund (IMF)—have heightened Canadians’ awarenessof broader poverty issues. In particular, theevents of September 11, 2001, resultedin many analysts pointing to the growingchasm between rich and poor nations asa trigger for international violence andterrorism and a threat to world security.

The issue of global poverty is par-ticularly pressing since the neo-liberalcourse proposed by the WTO and oth-ers has become increasingly suspect.The vision that international investmentin the economies of developing coun-tries, combined with open markets andmore liberalized trade, would level theplaying field and trickle down to theworld’s poor has not been fulfilled.Developing countries, in particular in

Africa, have made relatively little head-way in reducing poverty levels. Indeed,the World Bank suggests that the eco-nomic situation for most of Africa isworse today than it was 40 years ago.Although Africa is home to about 10 per-cent of the world population, its grossdomestic product (GDP—the value of allgoods and services produced annually)is only about 1 percent of the globalGDP, and the continent receives less than1 percent of foreign direct investment.Meanwhile, protectionist policies (tariffsand quotas on foreign imports) in NorthAmerica and the European Union makeit almost impossible for African goodsto enter these markets (Rees, 2002;Khalif, 2002).

The problem is not confined toAfrica. Around the globe, the rich havebecome richer and the poor, poorer. In1970, the richest 10 percent of theworld’s population earned 19 times theincome of the poorest 10 percent. By1997, the ratio grew to 27:1. By this time,the wealthiest 1 percent of the world’spopulation earned as much income asthe poorest 57 percent, and the 25 mil-lion wealthiest Americans (0.4 percentof the global population) received anincome larger than that of the poorest2 billion people on earth (43 percent ofthe global population) (Rees, 2002). Thiseconomic pattern of inequality translatesinto a myriad of other inequalities.Currently, 90 percent of the world’s med-ical health research dollars focus on thehealth problems of 20 percent of the

global population. Cancer and heart dis-ease take pre-eminence while the infec-tious diseases such as malaria andtuberculosis, which cause half the deathsin developing countries, receive rela-tively little attention (Calamai, 2002). TheAIDS pandemic brings into clear focusthe life and death consequences ofglobal inequities. There are an estimated25 million people in sub-Saharan Africawith HIV/AIDS and, despite the devel-opment of life-saving drug regimens inWestern countries, 2.3 million of thoseafflicted die each year. In some areas,the population of 15- to 24-year-oldfemales has been decimated andchildren are left to the care of orphan-ages, aging relatives, or the streets (www.stephenlewisfoundation.org).

The rich nations have not rushedforward to resolve the global inequali-ties. The IMF is a specialized UnitedNations agency with 182 member coun-tries, created in 1944 to help maintainthe world monetary system. The WorldBank was set up as a lender of last resortto the least industrialized nations. TheWTO (which is a successor to otherinternational trade organizations) isintended to bring countries together toimprove international trade and, indi-rectly, encourage global standards inenvironmental protections, worker pro-tections, and so on. The history of thevarious global governing agencies iscomplex, but their roles remain hotlydebated and global inequality is agrowing concern.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 107

Even more direct efforts at assistingdeveloping countries through theprovision of foreign aid have had limitedresults and elicited only limited enthu-siasm on the part of richer nations. OnlyDenmark, the Netherlands, Sweden,Norway, and Luxembourg have met theUnited Nations target of contributing0.7 percent of their GDP to foreign aid.Canada contributes a scant 0.25 percent,behind much smaller economies suchas Portugal and New Zealand. Indeed,Canadian foreign aid contributionsin 2008 were at their lowest level in30 years. Interestingly, at the bottom ofthe pack of 22 wealthy nations provid-ing developmental aid to foreign coun-tries is the United States, contributing0.10 percent of its GDP (“SaturdaySpecial,” 2002, p. A25).

Currently, about one in three of theworld’s 6 billion people live in a stateof “extreme poverty” and inhabitantsin 21 countries are subsisting on aver-age incomes of less than U.S.$1000 ayear, while at the wealthy end of thescale, citizens of 17 wealthy nationsaverage U.S.$20 000 a year. As widelypublicized by Live Aid and other anti-poverty groups, if less than 1 percentof the income of the wealthiest coun-tries was redirected to the poorest,almost everyone on the globe wouldhave enough to eat as well as adequatehealth and education (Williams, 2004).At present, however, the future forglobal poverty appears bleak. Theglobal population is expected to growby another 2 billion people over thenext 25 years, 97 percent of whom will

live in poorer countries (Rees, 2002;Crane, 2000).

Certainly, if the growing strains ofglobal and local inequalities are notaddressed, the negative consequenceswill likely impact on both the rich andpoor (Laxer, 1998). Globalization—withits world trade and world travel in themidst of a world economy—ensures thatwe all share the outcomes. Ultimately,while the wealthy nations haveattempted to create “gated communi-ties,” disease and environmentaldestruction cannot be kept out. If poorcountries continue to plunder their nat-ural resources in order to survive and inthe process disregard environmentalconsequences, everyone on the planetwill bear the results.

While the restrictions vary between provinces andCanada has yet to sign Convention 138, the exploitation ofchild labour in Canada is not knowingly tolerated. Childlabour exists in many other parts of the globe, however.Globalization exposes the poorest people to some of theharshest working conditions. Consider chocolate, for exam-ple. Many Canadians and Americans were shocked to learnin early 2000 that some of their favourite candies might havebeen produced by child labourers in West Africa. In 2000,the U.S. State Department, Knight Ridder, and the BBCreported that roughly 15 000 children worked in conditionsof forced labour picking beans in Ghana and Ivory Coast.Trafficked from extremely poor countries such as Mali andBurkina Faso, the children worked on some of the 1.5 mil-lion small cocoa farms in West Africa. These farms producemore than half the world’s cacao, used to make candy, cook-ies, or cocoa butter for cosmetics. Attempts have been madeto curb child labour on the cocoa plantations. One recentresult is the Cocoa Protocol, a partnership of the majorchocolate companies, government officials, and others. Itcalled for a deadline of July 1, 2005, to ensure that all cocoabean products would be grown and processed without

violating internationally accepted labour standards.Unfortunately, child labour still thrives on cocoa plantationseven amid efforts by activists and others who have filed suitagainst Nestlé, ADM, and Cargill for their violations of inter-national child labour laws.

All forms of slavery have not been eliminated. Childslavery in the form of the trafficking of young girls for thesex trade affects all parts of the globe, even Canada (seeChapter 6 for a more in-depth discussion of slavery).

A CONCLUDING NOTEConsider again the three families in the opening vignette.Remember that they represent three worlds of development—that is, globalization, inequality, and development. Their lifechances—from access to material possessions to their oppor-tunities for education and even the likely age at which theywill die—are profoundly affected by globalization and itsconsequences. The division of the globe into interconnectedunits of nations with more or less wealth and more or lesspower and prestige is much more than a matter of theoreticalinterest. In fact, it is yourlife we are talking about.

What Is GlobalizationWHAT IS GLOBALIZATION?

Globalization involves the interaction and integration ofincreasing numbers of people in the world through interna-tional trade and investment, travel and tourism, and infor-mation technology and the mass media. p. xxx.

Globalization and Patterns of Movement of PeopleHOW DOES GLOBALIZATION IMPACT THE MOVEMENTOF PEOPLE?

The globalization of communications technology, the per-vasiveness of mass communication—including television,

SUMMARY AND REVIEW

This controversy is also a peerScholar assignment in .


05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 12:49 PM Page 108

film, videos, and music—and cheap air travel open theworld to more people through increased tourism and immi-gration. pp. xxx–xxx.

HOW DOES GLOBALIZATION IMPACT THE PAID ANDUNPAID WORK OF WOMEN?

Globalization involves cutting costs, especially labour costs.This means factories and offices are closed in developedcountries and transplanted to less developed countries,where labour—and women’s labour in particular—is cheap.In the developed world, globalization means depressingwages and benefits for workers, especially vulnerable work-ers such as immigrant women. pp. xxx–xxx.

Globalization: The IssuesWHAT ARE THE MAIN ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINSTGLOBALIZATION?

Proponents of globalization argue that poor countriesand their citizens benefit economically from increasedemployment opportunities and rising standards of living.Opponents of globalization point to the increased wealth,power, and privilege enjoyed by the developed and rich partsof the world that come at the expense of the less developedand poorer regions of the globe. Democracy, human rights,and labour rights are said to be undermined by institutionssuch as the IMF and the World Bank. pp. xxx–xxx.

Globalization, Inequality, and DevelopmentHOW ARE THE WORLD’S NATIONS STRATIFIED?

The model favoured by the authors of this text divides theworld’s nations into three groups: most industrialized, indus-trializing, and least industrialized. This layering representsrelative property, power, and prestige. The oil-rich nationsare an exception. pp. xxx–xxx.

Sociological Theories of Global and SocialEconomic DevelopmentWHAT ARE THE MAIN SOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES OFECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT?

The main sociological theories that seek to account for globalstratification are imperialism and colonization, worldsystem theory, dependency theory, and the culture ofpoverty. pp. xxx–xxx.

WHAT MAKES CANADA A SEMIPERIPHERAL COUNTRYAND WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT TO KNOW?

Canada’s major economic sectors, with the exception ofbanking, insurance, and transportation, are heavily foreignowned and/or controlled. Canada ships its natural resourcesprimarily to core countries but has direct investment outletsin the Caribbean and in other peripheral countries of theworld economy. Canada’s state policies, such as the FTA andNAFTA, which make us “open for business” to globalization,have consequences for Canadian employment and social andlife choices. pp. xxx–xxx.

The Structures of GlobalizationHOW IS THE SYSTEM OF GLOBAL STRATIFICATIONMAINTAINED?

There are three basic explanations for why nations remainstratified. Neocolonialism is the ongoing dominance ofthe least industrialized nations by the most industrializednations. A second explanation attributes stratificationto the influence of multinational corporations, whichoperate across national boundaries. New technologies givefurther advantage to the most industrialized nations.pp. xxx–xxx.

KEY TERMScapitalist world economy

103colonization 102culture of poverty 104dependency theory 104

Export Processing Zone(EPZ) 97

export processing zones 97

globalization 104

imperialism 102multinational

corporations 105neocolonialism 105periphery 103

semiperiphery 103transnational

corporations 105 world system 103

The Stephen Lewis Foundationwww.stephenlewisfoundation.orgThe Stephen Lewis Foundation website provides informationon the AIDS pandemic in Africa and the need for greater

All URLs listed are current as of the printing of this book.WEBLINKS

Globalization and Tourismwww.planeta.comPlaneta.com is the first website focusing on ecotourism,conservation, and tourism’s effects on local communities.


05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 12:49 PM Page 109

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

1. Do you think that the low wage factories of multina-tional corporations, located in such countries as Mexicoor China, represent exploitation or opportunity? Why?

2. Think of something you use every day—such as a cell-phone or iPod, or Starbucks or Tim Horton’s coffee—

and find out where it was manufactured and/or assem-bled, marketed, and sold. How easy was it to find out?What did your journey of discovery teach you aboutglobalization?

Explore the topics covered in this chapter on MySocLab using the access information provided with this text. Interactiveresources for studying include multimedia tutorials, video clips, practice tests, quizzes, and animated maps and figures.


action from Western countries. Stephen Lewis, a prominentCanadian, is the United Nations’ special envoy for HIV/AIDSin Africa.

Runaway World: A BBC 1999 Lecture Series by Anthony Giddenshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_99/The website provides access to text, audio, and video lecturesgiven by Anthony Giddens, who plainly and succinctlydissects the links between globalization and its impact ontradition, the family, and democracy.

Globalization 101www.globalization101.org/Sponsored by The Levin Institute (a graduate institute of theState University of New York), this website provides useful,up-to-date information about globalization.

Anti-Globalizationwww.anti-marketing.com/anti-globalization.htmlAn introduction to anti-globalization, including links to anti-globalization and pro globalization organizations.

World Social Forumwww.wsf2008.net/The main web page of WSF2008, an anti-globalizationnetwork.

05_hen_ch05.qxd 10/17/08 10:43 AM Page 110

Documents

5 Globalization - Pearson · PDF filecable worker for the provincial power company. Patti is an ele- ... with Canada placing sixth after Saudi Arabia and ... national contact between