Forces of Globalization: Analyzing Current Trends and Future Prospects

This essay explores the trajectory of globalization, challenging the notion of its demise and highlighting its evolving nature in the 21st century. It addresses concerns arising from the 2008 financial crisis and the rise of nationalism, while emphasizing the continued importance of globalization through developments like the BRICS summit and emerging multilateralism. The essay argues that the current economic turmoil is not a result of globalization itself, but rather stems from rapidly changing technology and increasing economic inequality. It suggests that businesses should adapt to the changing environment by embracing both localization and aggregation strategies, and that inclusive globalization is the key to addressing current challenges. The essay concludes that while the pace and form of globalization may change, it remains an irreversible trend with significant benefits for global prosperity and sustainable development.

Forces of globalization
Introduction
The 1990s witnessed the opening of two major economies namely India and China, downfall of Soviet
communism and the rising of multilateralism. The globalization showered the prosperity of mankind. But
after the 2008 financial crises, the future of globalization is again in the debate as it was done in the
1930s, after the great depression of 1929 (Sneader, 2018). This essay aims to identify the facts which
support that globalization is the future of the mankind; the end of globalization is exaggerated
(Bentahila and Davies, 2002). It has been proved by various developments like BRICS summit in
Johannesburg, the statement by Singapore in favor of globalization and emerging multilateralism, that
globalization is not going anywhere. The globalization may assume different forms in future but
globalization is the future of mankind in the 21st century. Thus business organizations should not
exaggerate the death of globalization (Ganesh, 2018). It is estimated that current economic turmoil will
end soon, resulting in further growth of globalization.
Future of globalization
Due to the trade policy war started by Trump government of the USA, questions have been raised about
the future of globalization. Nationalist tendencies have raised their head in the form of many
developments like Brexit, terrorism, and protectionism (passi, 2005). Everyone, especially the middle
class of highly developed countries, tries to find the reason of current turmoil in globalization. The world
has never witnessed such a form of globalization before but another aspect is that there has also been
no such a wide economic inequality in recent past. Globalization has led to the accumulation of wealth
in the hands of few (Foroohar, 2018). Many international agencies have revealed in their survey or index
that the inequality has been an all-time high in the 21st century (Roberston et al, 2012).
It has been worth mentioning here that globalization, which until now has entered the manufacturing
sector, is rapidly going to enter services sectors. The day is not away when the services will be taken at
the global scale; the regional level hospital will transcend the geographical boundaries and give services
to the person sitting in remote locations. The correct reason for current turmoil is not globalization
(Sturgeon et al, 2008). The reason is to find out in rapidly changing technology which has created the
two classes viz have and has not (Kramer, 2017). Those who have been left behind are pointing towards
globalization. In such a situation, nationalism has gained spirit (Kuper, 2018). The reason for dampening
economic growth has been the reduced commodity prices and increased value of US dollar in past few
years (Hunt, 2018).
In such a situation, some scholars are predicting the end of globalization but as mentioned by Liu
Xiaoming, economic globalization is irreversible (2018). New regions and institutions like BRICS have
been emerging as the harbinger of globalization. The combined GDP of BRICS has crossed the mark of 23
% of the world GDP. In addition to this, 44 countries of Arica formed a new free trade bloc which shows
that globalization is still alive and will remain so in future through the power centers may change their

regional positions (Kayser, 2008). Moody’s Analytics said that if the China and Mexico retaliate against
the protectionism policy of Donald Trump government, it will affect only 4 % of total exports of the USA.
Thus the end of globalization is a myth; this is only the euphoria generated in the times of economic
turmoil.
Recently, few corporate giants like GE changed the policy and embraced localization due to the rising
spirit of nationalism (Donnan, 2018). This is implied by many as the end of globalization. But after
carefully analyzing the situation, it would be revealed that this is merely the strategy of the corporate
giant to adapt itself to the changing environment. Emerging economies have been taking advantage of
arbitrage like low labor cost, reduced tax levels etc.; thus new corporate giants have been emerging like
Alibaba from China.
It can be argued that even 2016 presidential elections in the USA were contested with the fervor of
nationalism. Donald Trump won the elections by raising the spirit of nationalism among the US citizens.
In addition to this, the Brexit has been termed as the end of globalization. But the vertical and horizontal
penetration of globalization has been so immense that no factor can cause the death of globalization. it
can be said that Inclusive globalization is the need of the hour; the current trend of globalization cannot
be reversed (Berry, 2008). Earlier nationalism promoted territorialism, capitalism, and statism, now
these plural identities are feeding more and more globality, hyper-capitalism and polycentrism (Sandbu,
2018).
In addition to this, the performance of different kind of corporate giants may be dismal despite peak
years of globalization e.g. fortune 500 company consistently witnessed a low average return in the
decades of 1990s and 2000s (Author, 2003). During the age of great depression, the breadth of
globalization did not change much so it is highly predicted that this time also, the length and breadth of
globalization will not be changed much. There growth rate of globalization may decline but it will
continue to grow consistently (Hill, 2018).
Results of globalization
The globalization has brought prosperity in totality (Chiesa et al, 2012). The emerging economies have
gained very much from globalization since the opening of their economy in the 1990s. It was mentioned
at BRICS summit in Johannesburg that, BRICS contributed more than 50% of economic growth in 2017.
The world is not as flat as it was made in the 1930s. The globalization survived those times; so it is aptly
clear that globalization will win in the current situation also. Undersea internet cables now span about
1.1 kilometers, this has brought prosperity; nobody can deny that it will further grow. The malnutrition
and maternal mortality rates have been reduced due to after effects of globalization (Sandbu, 2018).
The sustainable development goals cannot be achieved without globalization. It has reduced the cultural
barrier; English has become the widely accepted language (Deem, 2001). The multinational companies
may focus on localization of their products, but the fourth industrial revolution cannot be achieved
without globalization. The FDI flow across G20 countries is now double the level of 2005. This shows that

globalization has more benefits than harm. It also implies the above-mentioned fact that globalization is
not dying (Wolf, 2018). The 1990S and 2000s can become peak years of globalization in long-term but
this irreversible trend cannot be rolled back. In coming years, there is every chance that nationalism will
be taken over by digital technologies and artificial intelligence.
The globalization has reduced the distance between nationalities; today the person sitting in India fixes
the problem of the person of the USA from its distant location so easily (Ganesh, 2018). This change has
been possible only by globalization. As propounded by the theory of eclecticism, the capitalism has
spurred globalization in four ways: market expansion, accounting practices, asset mobility, and large
areas of commodification. Regionalism has been overcome by the communication means to put forth by
globalization. The work can be outsourced to any person having an internet connection so the world has
become integrated. Some currencies like the Japanese Yen, US Dollar circulate globally; the financial
transaction is possible in any currency due to different means of transactions provided by the
globalization (Akoojee and McGrath, 2004).
Globalization has increased the foreign trade; the products which used to be present only in developed
countries earlier now can be accessed by the citizens of developing and third-world countries.
Globalization has increased the competition, which has resulted in better quality of products. In the 21st
century, the justice system has also become globalized (Giles, 2017). The culprits can be apprehended by
Interpol from any corner of the world. The globalization has alleviated the global poverty in emerging
countries like India, China, and Vietnam. It has unleashed the opportunities for the student to study in
any country thus making education globalized element. But the globalization has also been blamed for
its negative effects. Job insecurity has become the widely used term in developed countries (edition,
2017).
The jobs are getting transferred from developed countries to developing countries due to low wages
prevalent there. This has generated anguish among the citizens of the developed world. In addition to
this, it has been seen that, though few developing countries are able to reduce poverty, the African
region has witnessed the increase in poverty level among their citizens. The other aspect, which has also
been highlighted above is the economic inequality. Rich is becoming richer and poor is becoming poorer
day by day (Stephens, 2017).
What the organizations should do?
Now the question arises that if globalization has brought these results and still there is economic turmoil
so what the national and multinational business organizations should do? The companies should adopt
the model of arbitrage and aggregate along with adaptation. Adaptation is necessary to cope up with
the challenging times so it cannot be ignored. At the same time, aggregate should be focused upon so
that economies of scale can be generated (Sandbu, 2017). Because of the rising tide of nationalism, the
companies must adopt the policy of cosmopolitanism at the highest level. The business organizations
need to analyze where to compete and how to compete?

Another aspect which needs consideration is the changing dimensions of society. With increased
nationalist fervor the business organizations need to focus on society of the particular region. It is
proved that countries of the same region respond similarly to the same kind of environment. Thus zero-
sum game will not be effective in the current situation. The reputation of the business is all time low, in
such cases, there is a need to engage with society. There is a danger to be shifted too far towards the
localization, thus there is a need to maintain effective balance (Garcia, 2017).
Conclusion
From the above-mentioned points, it is clear that the phase of globalization is not over. Looking at the
current situation, there can be the reduction in the pace of globalization or the globalization can take
different forms in future, but it cannot be denied that globalization will remain an important aspect for
business organizations. Thus, business organizations should not go too far towards the localization. To
fix the current problems, there is need to have changes in domestic policy, not closing of borders.
Protectionism is not the panacea of the economic problems the world is currently grappling with. This
economic turmoil soon is over according to economists (Xiaoming, 2018). Already, the US dollar is
consistently rising against other currencies and the oil prices have started touching new highs.
The negative effects of globalization are overblown and statements predicting the death of globalization
are exaggerated (edition, 2017). Globalization cannot be blamed for rising economic inequality in the
USA as it has been proven that growing technology and reduction in unions have contributed to
economic inequality in the USA. The example of Netherland can be taken here, which has traded to GDP
ratio six times of the USA but it has maintained the reasonable economic distribution. So globalization
cannot be blamed without sufficient shreds of evidence (Washington, 2018). The world should rather
focus on inclusive globalization.

References
A Bentahila, E.D., 2002. Language Mixing in Rai Music: Localisation or Globalisation? Language &
Communication, 1(1), pp.43-56.
Author, A., 2003. Globalisation in chemistry education research and practice. Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, 1(2), pp.23-34.
B Kayser, A.S., 2008. Globalisation of anti-doping: the reverse side of the medal. Bmj, 1(1), pp.4-7.
BD Chiesa, J.S.C.H., 2012. Languages in a Global World: Learning for Better Cultural Understanding. ERIC,
2(2), pp.10-15.
Berry, J., 2008. Globalistaion and acculturation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, pp.2-5.
Deem, R., 2001. Globalisation, New Managerialism, Academic Capitalism and Entrepreneurialism in
Universities: is the local dimension still important? Comparative education, pp.12-14.
Donnan, S., 2018. Four reasons for optimism in these dark days for globalisation. Financial Times, 4(1),
pp.4-23.
edition, p., 2017. Globalisation has marginalised many regions in the rich world. Left in the Lurch, 18
October.
edition, P., 2017. The Globalisation's losers: The right way to help declining places. Time for fresh
thinking about the changing economics of geography, 21 October.
Foroohar, R., 2018. Globalised business is a US security issue. Financial Times, 1(1), pp.12-17.
Ganesh, J., 2018. A gourmand’s guide to globalisation. Financial Times, pp.24-34.
Ganesh, J., 2018. Why we’ve got the suburbs all wrong. Financial Times, pp.23-34.
Garcia, C., 2017. Snap AV: A globalisation Rorschach test. Financial Times.
Giles, C., 2017. Economists must do more to defend liberal order. Financial Times, pp.4-27.
Hill, A., 2018. Technology, globalisation and the squeeze on good jobs. Financial Times, 2(1), pp.1-20.
Hunt, D., 2018. Death of globalisation is greatly exaggerated. Financial Times, 2(2), pp.45-47.
Kramer, 2017. A survey finds support for both globalisation and import tariffs. The economist, pp.23-28.
Kuper, S., 2018. Globalism 1, Nationalism 0. Financial Times, 2(1), pp.23-29.

passi, A., 2005. Globalisation, Academic Capitalism, and the Uneven Geographies of International
Journal Publishing Spaces. Environment and Planning, 1(2), pp.3-5.
S Akoojee, S.M., 2004. Assessing the Impact of Globalization on South African Education and Training: A
Review of the Evidence so Far. Globalisation, Societies and Education, pp.12-15.
S Robertson, K.M.A.V., 2013. Public private partnerships in education: New actors and modes of
governance in a globalizing world. 1st ed. Books.google.com.
Sandbu, M., 2017. Globalisation goes on without those who want to get off Premium. FinancialTimes,
pp.18-20.
Sandbu, M., 2018. Globalisation is proving the optimists right. Financial Times, 1(2), pp.1-13.
Sandbu, M., 2018. India’s mirror to the world Premium. Financial Times, 2(1), pp.36-43.
Sneader, K., 2018. Emerging markets can still drive global growth. Financial Times, pp.14-19.
Stephens, P., 2017. How to beat populism in Europe. Finnacial Times, 2(2), pp.25-29.
Timothy J. Sturgeon, O.M.J.V.B..G.G., 2008. Globalisation of the automotive industry: main features and
trends. International Journal of Technological Learning, Innovation and Development , 2(1), pp.24-45.
Washington, D., 2018. America and China are in a Proper Trade war. Tit for Tat, 20 September.
Wolf, M., 2018. A lost chance for reform of US corporate taxes. Financial Times.
Xiaoming, L., 2018. Brics countries show the US the benefits of globalisation. Financial Times, pp.20-26.