Globalization and Sustainability: Policy Analysis Report

This report examines the multifaceted relationship between globalization and sustainability, addressing key economic and social issues. It begins by comparing and contrasting "closing gaps" and "cultural comparative advantages" as policy responses to the challenges faced by Indigenous Aus...Read More

Running head: GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY
[Type the company name]
Globalization and sustainability
Answers
Student Name
[Pick the date]

GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY 1
Culture and closing gap
Cultural practices, information pattern and cultural appearance of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander are considered as origin of countless strength, flexibility and self-importance.
Strong cultural individuality is basic to indigenous fitness and community and emotional
happiness. Therefore, it is important to strengthen indigenous culture in order to close the gap
(Fowler et al., 2018). It is also considered as commitment by various Australian governments
which is linked with the concept of improving the situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander so that a better future can be offered to them and their children. Social inclusion will
help in strength culture which is the main objective of the government.
According to Council of Australian government one of the most sustainable commitment
which can improve the present condition of the people of Aborigional and Torres Strait
Islander in the form of building blocks. These building blocks must be linked with earlier
childhood, education, wellbeing, economic contribution and safe groups (Skerrett et al.,
2018). In order to close the gap, one of the most important aspects is to promote Indigenous
cultures, inheritances and linguistic with in the leadership of government. In addition to this,
it has been seen that there are some elements which has impacted the Indigenous Australian
culture through on successful grief, despair and confusion related to traditional gender roles,
beliefs and networks and support system.
The main difference between closing gap and cultural comparative advantages is that closing
gap only is connected with the benefits of the people which belong to Aborigional and Torres
Strait Islander. But cultural comparative advantages are connected with the benefits of both
sections of people. It means people who are involved and people for which this action has
been taken. Closing gap can bring positive impact in the life of Aborigional and Torres Strait
Islander but cultural comparative advantages can bring positive change in life of all the
participants.
One of the most important similarities in both closing gap and cultural comparative
advantages is that both actions are linked with the benefit of the people in terms of health as
well as education. Another important similarity between closing gap and cultural
comparative advantages is that both offer supportive factors in the form of policies and
programs to improve present situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population.
Both are considered as the strategy to eliminate or bring decline in the disadvantage related
to closing gap results. Both closing gap and cultural comparative advantage works for
strengthening Indigenous culture in order to close the gap with in the culture so that children
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander can move further or progress (Thompson et al.,
2018).
Free global trade, unequal development and unequal exchange

GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY 2
Free trade is always considered as important part of the outdoor expansion of the business
and capitalism. In addition it has offered a platform for new market so that fresh
merchandises can be observed beyond boundaries in order to support capitalism. It is also
considers as a main element in supporting the free trade on global level in term of business
expansion in which financial investment as well as services are offering across the
boundaries in order to develop a significant results (Anderson and Yotov, 2016). This aspect
was support in 19th century by British to expand their business across the world. But it seems
that global free trade is based on one common assumption which is every country is equally
developed and is connected with capitalist space as well as ultimate reach. This has benefited
many developed countries across the world. But at the same it free trade is also connected
with the reason of uneven and combined development which actually locks countries in
unequal exchange associations.
Unequal exchange is being considered as central issue of many strands which are connected
with Marxist social theory. It is linked with the modes of production and their global
approach in link with labour value. It simple indicates that free trade market is not offering
equal benefit to the entire partner. In fact it is creating an unequal development among them
because of trade power and their economic exchange ideologies (Burawoy, 2015). It is also
considered as unfair mode of expanding business beyond the capital boundaries. Every
country has their own currency and values of those currencies are also not same on the global
level as per the world trade organization. Therefore if some deal is providing benefit to one
country it does not mean that other country will also be benefited with the same deal.
In addition to this, economic inequalities with in the states are continuously growing which
has created big challenge for the global trade business in this world of competition. As per
world trade organization it has been found that developed countries are exploring multiple
ways to expand their business beyond their boundaries but at the same time, it has created an
environment of protest and resistance with in the developed countries because this free trade
has impact the income level of the individuals which are associated with the business
(Hudson, 2016). In fact it has been seen that business profit associated with this free trade has
been marginalized and has created unequal shareholding within the partners in terms of
economic exchanges. This has create unequal development among the states because profit
share is not been distributed equally among the partners in terms of trade and business. In
fact it has offered more benefit to underdeveloped countries as compared to developed
companies because their exchange values have huge gap within them.
Impact of controlling Oligopoly behaviour
Oligopoly is actually a market pattern in which number of firm decide the price of the
product in the market or it can be said that they have monopoly control over the market
structure regarding the product setting price in order to increase the industry profit. This
result in increasing the price of the product as compared to market clearing price. In this

GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY 3
firms try to develop a monopoly environment in order to reduce their individual output which
helps them to increase their profit margin. But, in corporate governance this act is being
considered as unlawful and it becomes the duty of the government to control such strategies
in order to maintain a healthy competition in the business market (Tyers, 2015). Therefore, it
has become essential for government to supervise such action on regular base. Government
has introduce anti-competitive act in order to bring restriction against oligopoly behaviour
within the business market. But this act cannot be applicable in all cases because their every
market is different.
One of the biggest problem which arise due to regulation of oligopoly behaviour of firms by
government is that if the market is not able to find better competition that the chances or
probability of market failure increases (Chen et al., 2018). Therefore, it is not easy to put
regulation in this behaviour until the government has collected all the essential information
associated with this market behaviour. In addition to this it also creates panic among the
market partners which directly impact the price of the product.
Another big problem which arise from this government regulation is creating unbalance in
the pricing strategy because price regulation is completed based on perfect completion and if
government will put anti-competition law, then there will be no space for perfect competition
in the market (Polemis and Oikonomou, 2018). This will create an imbalance of price
circulation flow within the market because every organization cannot effort innovative
technology which helps them to control operating price. In this case, it will create two values
for marginal cost, one will be high and other will be low which means that regulator either
have to select regulated price or they have to select free market pattern.

GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY 4
References
Anderson, J.E. and Yotov, Y.V. (2016) Terms of trade and global efficiency effects of free
trade agreements, 1990–2002. Journal of International Economics, 99, pp.279-298.
Burawoy, M. (2015) Facing an unequal world. Current Sociology, 63(1), pp.5-34.
Chen, J., Xu, L., Mo, F. and Bian, Z. (2018) Regulation of Education Market Access Based
on Mixed Oligopoly Model. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri, 18(5), pp.1389-1399.
Fowler, A.C., Ewens, B., Vafeas, C., Delves, L., Hayward, C., Nannup, N. and Baum, G.
(2018) Closing the gap: A whole of school approach to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
inclusivity in higher education. Nurse education in practice, 30, pp.86-90.
Hudson, R. (2016) Rising powers and the drivers of uneven global development. Area
Development and Policy, 1(3), pp.279-294.
Polemis, M.L. and Oikonomou, A. (2018) Tacit collusion or parallel behaviour in
oligopolistic markets? The two faces of Janus. European Competition Journal, 14(1), pp.1-
37.
Skerrett, D.M., Gibson, M., Darwin, L., Lewis, S., Rallah, R. and De Leo, D. (2018) Closing
the gap in aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth suicide: A social–emotional wellbeing
service innovation project. Australian Psychologist, 53(1), pp.13-22.
Thompson, G.N., Gee, C., Talley, A.C. and Nicholas, J. (2018) Indigenous health: one gap is
closed. The Medical Journal of Australia, 209(1), pp.14-15.
Tyers, R. (2015) Service Oligopolies and Australia's Economy Wide Performance. Australian
Economic Review, 48(4), pp.333-356.

GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY 5