The future of globalization
|Topics:||🌎 Globalization, ✔️ Political Science, Democracy, Leadership, 👨💻 Human Development|
Almost three decades ago, business leaders believed that the world was becoming ‘flat’. The global firms, unrestricted by the country borders, would dominate the world’s economy. These claims were proven wrong, especially, with the current political events in the world. Business leaders are struggling to adjust to a world many imagined impossible. However, the notion of a borderless world is crashing down. The traditional pillars of globalization have fallen off: the United States of America and the United Kingdoms, following the emergence of Brexit and the inauguration of Donald Trump as the president of America. However, the recent persuasion and pressure on the new protectionist for a total retreat from globalization is an overreaction. The pulling out of America from globalization is a setback but not necessarily an off switch to globalization. An overreliance on localization would hamper firms to form value across borders and distance through applying the promising array of globalization plots that are still efficient. This strategy is a hopeful and can work well to take the rest of the world into the future. Today’s turmoil-the almost fall of globalization-can be countered through the reworking of multinationals’ plans, approaches to community engagement, and, organizational structures. This article explores the future of globalization and how it will affect the countries of the world.
Globalization is foreseen to stumble in the coming years and many countries are deemed to suffer. Business leaders had a dream that the world becomes flat and a single large market. This would be achieved through globalization (Hüppauf, 58). However, this idea seems unreal and unreachable with the current political situation. Many countries especially, the third world countries, will suffer a great deal. These countries are the developing countries who largely depend on the global world to boost them. Meaning, if globalization scrambles, every nation will be expected to stand on its own and depend on its own produces. However, currently, many developing countries depend on the already established states to assist them. Some of these developing countries have parts that suffer a lot of tragedies such as hunger, drought, floods and many more calamities. They lack the proper technologies to help them counter such disasters when they occur. Additionally, they are unable to adequately support and satisfy their citizens’ needs especially in dire times. These nations depend on foreign help; they depend on globalization so much that in a failing global world, they are on the verge of sinking. It would require them to rely on themselves and their industries to survive, which is not enough. Thus, the third world countries in the current turmoil, are the losers of globalization. The developed countries, therefore, become the winners.
It is however, inaccurate to claim globalization is failing because two leading practitioners pulled out. It is correct that U.S. A and the UK, play a vital role in the global market. But the world should not give up on their plans because America and the UK have other ideas. In fact, China is rising to be a significant fighter of globalization and establishing their walls in the business market (Adam, 32). The country is fast growing and also very promising. Therefore, this is some shade of light in the previous plans of making the world flat. China is likely to influence most of their neighboring countries such as North Korea and Japan. Additionally, the recent refusal of China to form a partnership with Donald Trump shows the rest of the world is still eager to venture more into globalization. Also, after Trump pulled out of TPP, the remaining countries continued to make plans and plots that show more admiration for globalization. Therefore, there is still hope for the future, globalization and the dreams of the business leaders, to make the world one giant business market, is always valid.
People tend to exaggerate on the turmoil of globalization. Making the world one giant market is overrated. The world consists of the developed and underdeveloped countries. There is a significant gap between these two groups. Having a single market means, they will have to trade despite the deficit. Meaning, one can country will suffer a setback, or the other state will be unable to purchase and compete fairly (Steger, 135). Additionally, it would be difficult to set prices: the developed nations will set high rates that the developing and underdeveloped countries cannot manage; setting of low prices will mean no profit for the developed countries. Thus, making the world “flat” is an exaggeration to the benefits of globalization. I would say America took a tricky turn in pulling out from the support of globalization. The country is vast and a superpower, however, it cannot survive on its own. Every country in the world requires another country to escape, through the exchange of goods and services. This is because not a single nation produces everything they demand. Some of their requirements are imported.
In conclusion, it is an exaggeration to claim that the future threatens globalization. Countries will rise, and the implementation of localization through the utilization of the strategies of globalization that are still efficient will see globalization successfully to the future, dispute the constraints.
- Adam, B. “Future, Globalization and the.” The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Globalization, 2012, pp. 22-43 doi:10.1002/9780470670590.wbeog224.
- Hüppauf, B. “Globalization – Threats and Opportunities.” Globalization and the Future of German, 2017, pp. 45-98 doi:10.1515/9783110197297.3.
- Steger, M. “8. Global crises and the future of globalization.” Globalization, 2013, pp. 131-137, doi:10.1093/actrade/9780199662661.003.0008.
Offered for reference purposes only.