IIHFD
Human Factor Academy Papers
Tapping into and Benefiting from the Forces and Agents of Globalization: Creating an Integrated Vehicle for Global Participation and Gain-sharing
Senyo Adjibolosoo, PhD
Fermanian School of Business
Point Loma Nazarene University
San Diego, CA
Published in Review of Human Factor Studies, Volume 8, No. 1: June 2002 (pages 12-33). This Paper has also been published as a chapter in: Globalization and the Human Factor: Critical Insights—Published by Ashgate (2004).
ABSTRACT
Today, the forces of globalization continue to tip the rules and scales of gain sharing in favor of the inhabitants of the developed countries. In light of this observation, the primary question is: should the residents of the developing countries totally disengage themselves from the rest of the world in an attempt to avoid the negative implications of globalization? To provide some enlightening answers to this query, it is argued in this paper that total disengagement is not a sustainable solution. Instead, it is only through the development of the appropriate human factor (HF) that the poor people could stand a greater chance of benefiting from the forces and agents of globalization.
1. INTRODUCTION
Given current events, it can be argued that the forces of globalization work to connect and intensify the degree of interconnectedness among different groups of people in the Global Village. Its patterns of interaction and flows know no political boundaries. The escalating pace of global interconnectedness has tremendous implications for the degree of intensity of global interactions among various people through modern transport and telecommunications systems and the diffusion of ideas and information. The volume and frequency of the movement of the factors of production, goods, and services continue to skyrocket. Held, McGrew, Goldblatt, and Perraton (1999) carried out an extensive research program to discover the extent to which the forces of globalization and regionalization collude to alter the existing economic order of the world, national sovereignty, and internal autonomy. Starting of with their definition for the concept of globalization, Held et al (1999) noted that:
Globalization reflects a widespread perception that the world is rapidly being molded into a shared social space by economic and technological forces and that developments in one region of the world can have profound consequences for the life chances of individuals or communities on the other side of the globe. For many, globalization is also associated with a sense of political fatalism and chronic insecurity in that the sheer scale of contemporary social and economic change appears to outstrip the capacity of national governments or citizens to control, contest or resist that change. The limits to national politics, in other words, are forcefully suggested by globalization . . . Globalization may be thought of initially as a widening, deepening and speeding up of worldwide interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary social life, from the cultural to the criminal, the financial to the spiritual” [pp. 1 and 2].
To Held et al (1999, p. 15), therefore, globalization is about the great implications the stretching of social, political, and economic activities exerts on the way of life of a people in their own environment. Globalization reveals the interconnectedness within and across regions of the world due to the growing networks made up of social, economic, and political activities of different groups. It reveals the extent to which the actions of one group of people could either exert significant positive or negative impact on the practices of another group of people. The complete comprehension of the primary sources and implications of globalization requires clearer and deeper insights into the intellectual foundation of the process of globalization and its future trajectories. Globalization is perceived to be a process or set of processes that alter social relations and transactions in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity, and impact. As a set of processes, globalization generates networks, interactions, the exercise of power, and massive social, economic, and political activities on transcontinental or interregional basis (Held et al, 1999, p. 16). In addition to these, the moment-by-moment flows and movements of artifacts, human practices, information, and many others are significant aspects of globalization. In most cases, these flows exhibit regularized patterns of global interactions, exchanges, and transfers between people living in different regions of planet earth. Aninat (2002, p.1) sees globalization to be the “process through which an increasingly free flow of ideas, people, goods, services, and capital leads to the integration of economies and societies.” He points out further that the process of globalization continues to forge trade expansion, technological diffusion, continuing migration, the cross-fertilization of cultural traditions, unprecedented volumes of capital flows, and growing information exchange and storage. In his view, therefore, as the process of globalization escalates, the issues of primary concern, yet not central to the mandates of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, include the environment, labor rights, migration, and human rights. In light of these perceptions of the concept of globalization, various scholars continue to debate as to whether the process of globalization is a real life phenomenon or an intellectual conception aimed at the achievement of certain objectives of global capitalists and Western leaders (Carr, 1981; Gilpin, 1987; Ruigrok and Tulder, 1995; and Krugman, 1996). In general, it can be argued that the processes of globalization seems to be forcing the whole world into what we now refer to as the global village. Writing about the concept of the global village, Adjibolosoo (1998a, 117 and 119) observed:
As many of us are aware, the world is gradually being transformed into a global village. Technological developments and advancements, improved electronic devices, the electronic mail system and its accessories and well-organized transport and telecommunications systems continually remind humanity that we are more of a well-joined together global village, rather than scattered and severely disjoined countries. Disasters in one country have the tendency of impacting the economies and lives of other nations . . . Humanity is, therefore, reminded day by day by natural and humanly created events (i.e., earthquakes, famine, floods, wars, oil spills, environmental degradation, ethnic strife, etc.) that its many habitats are intricately intertwined. In view of these observations, it can be argued that the realization that naturally and/or artificially created events in one nation can affect every facet of life in other countries creates the feeling that the many habitats of humanity are, therefore, little fragments of a whole. This perception sets in motion an evolutionary process which calls for concerted group (joint) efforts which in turn lead to the creation of various means for either adapting to or solving the problems and dealing with the numerous concerns of all humanity. It is this realization which is shrinking the size of the world in terms of time, space and distance, and hence promoting the development of the global village.
Evident in this quotation is a deeper perception of globalization—a phenomenon through which humans from different parts of the world are doing their best to derive social, economic, and political benefits from all the four corners of the world. As many human events and activities suggest, the available gains to be derived from the process of globalization are of greater benefits to those in the developed rather than the developing countries. This conclusion underscores the search for answers as to how people of the developing countries could derive real benefits from the forces and agents of globalization. In what follows, I argue that any attempts aimed at improving the chances of these people to benefit from globalization must begin with the channeling of the critical minimum level of human energy and the necessary financial resources into the development of the appropriate HF without which these people would always contribute to but never able to derive any substantial and sustained benefits from contemporary globalization. To fully comprehend this line of thought, it is important that one understands the true meaning of the HF. The HF refers to:
The spectrum of personality characteristics and other dimensions of human performance that enable social, economic and political institutions to function and remain functional, over time. Such dimensions sustain the workings and application of the rule of law, political harmony, a disciplined labor force, just legal systems, respect for human dignity and the sanctity of life, social welfare, and so on. As is often the case, no social, economic or political institutions can function effectively without being upheld by a network of committed persons who stand firmly by them. Such persons must strongly believe in and continually affirm the ideals of society (Adjibolosoo, 1995, p. 33).
This definition for the HF addresses the key issue head on in that it highlights the significance of the HF to human endeavors, efforts, and activities. This paper tells a synthesized but compact version of the story of globalization, the forces and agents driving it, implications for governance, and the sovereignty of the nation state in the poor areas of the world. The remainder of this paper is presented in the following sequence. Section 2 spells out briefly the sources of contemporary globalization. In section 3, the views of the various schools of thought on globalization are outlined and briefly discussed. While section 4 contains the presentation on the implications of contemporary globalization from a HF perspective, section 5 carries some concluding remarks and propositions for public policy.
2. THE SOURCES OF GLOBALIZATION: ORTHODOX CONCEPTIONS
Globalization is a multifaceted phenomenon in that its many tentacles reach out into all areas of human endeavor in both developed and developing countries. For example, in every country, the forces and agents of globalization exert tremendous impact on the cultural, social, economic, political, and educational, life of a people. In every country, each of these aspects of human life is being stretched in both positive and negative ways in most countries—some much more than others. It is, therefore, important that when one presents a discourse on the sources of globalization, one must of necessity highlight the extent to which globalizing forces propel continuing transformation in each of these areas of human endeavor. The experience of war in ancient times, the evolution of industrialized warfare techniques in the modern era, and the prevailing geopolitical competition have together led to the escalation of the globalization of military conflict and rivalry in the twentieth century. During this era, the world experienced two major wars (i.e., World War I and II) and also a devastating Cold War. During the decades when the Cold War intensified, technological advancement led to the birthing of the Nuclear Age. This era in human history was an epoch dominated with the development and production of lethal weapons of mass destruction. The easy availability of these technological implements of war brought home to most people the reality of how humans could easily annihilate themselves off the face of planet earth. The world military order in terms of its evolution, structure, dynamics, the changing geography, and historical patterns of global military relations have also contributed tremendously to the processes of globalization.
Trade has not only become one of the primary vehicles for moving goods and services from one area to another, but also the means for technology transfer from one location to another. Through trading ventures and activities, domestic markets have become highly interconnected with international and global markets. Strong trade links have made it possible for people—especially from the developed countries—to gain access to almost any commodity they desire. Their supermarkets are always stocked with desirable commodities from all over the world—all year round. From this perspective, people hardly notice the seasonality that used to be the case when certain commodities were in and out of season. That is, scientific and technological advancement has made it possible to bring in commodities from all over the world to the places they are needed on continuing basis. Trade globalization refers to the prevalence of high levels of continuing interregional trade activities that make local markets get stocked with commodities from all over the world. Global trade has, therefore, become a system of regularized but unequal exchange of goods and services among different people’s groups from all over the world. The development and functioning of global financial systems and markets were made possible through the evolution of new financial instruments, the deregulation of national financial markets, growth of international banking, and many other financial institutions. Discussing the phenomenon of the globalization of finance, Häusler (2002, p. 1) observes that:
During the past two decades, financial markets around the world have become increasingly interconnected. Financial globalization has brought considerable benefits to national economies and to investors and savers, but it has also changed the structures of markets, creating new risks and challenges for market participants and policy makers.
Häusler argues further due to today’s forces and agents of financial globalization, it is possible for local manufacturers to borrow funds from elsewhere to finance their domestic business and manufacturing operations. In his estimation, some of the main factors that continue to promote the globalization of finance include the following:
1. Advances in information and computer technologies;
2. The globalization of national economies;
3. The liberalization of national financial and capital markets; and
4. Competition among the providers of information services.
From Häusler’s perspective, therefore, the key participants in the process of financial globalization include investment banks, securities firms, asset management groups, mutual funds, insurance companies, specialty and trade finance companies, hedge funds, and telecommunications, software, and food companies. Häusler (2002, p. 3) points out that in light of the ongoing emergence of these global business organizations:
Banks have been forced to find additional sources of revenue, including new ways of intermediating funds and fee-based businesses, as growing competition from nonblank financial intermediaries has reduced profit margins from banks’ traditional business—corporate lending financed by low-cost deposits—to extremely low levels. This is especially true in continental Europe, where there has been relatively little consolidation of financial institutions. Elsewhere, particularly in North America and the United Kingdom, banks are merging with other banks as well as with securities and insurance firms in efforts to exploit economies of scale and scope to remain competitive and increase their market shares.
Today corporate power and global production networks continue to transform the world. The role of transportation infrastructure, telecommunications systems, and institutions that support global labor markets and the migratory flow of labor are tremendous and expanding. Globalizing forces brought significant changes to different countries of the world in the 1980s and 1990s (Boughton, 2002). Cultural globalization is centuries old. The issue of instantaneous reporting of news and other events all across the globe simultaneously contributes to the speed of cultural globalization. In business, corporation trademarks have become powerful symbols of cultural globalization. In general, cultural globalization is reflected in the existence of trans-regional, trans-civilization, and transcontinental flows of cultural practices and institutions. The basic vehicle for the globalization of culture is the design and use of corporate infrastructure and business activities. This infrastructure, Held et al (1999) maintained, made available producers and networks that made use of technological and linguistic infrastructures with the contents they supply. According to Held et al (1999, p. 370),
The deepening of global markets for films, recorded music, news and television programming has been accompanied by the development of multinational culture industries, multinational telecommunication corporations and a variety of all alliances and projects that link them to each other as well as to MNCs in computer, software and electronic hardware. To these shifts we can also add the massively expanded infrastructure of international travel. Combined, these infrastructures, irrespective of their cultural consequences or content, have made for large increases in the circulation of ideas, artifacts and images at global and regional levels. They allow for the movement of images and objects over enormous distances with greater intensity, volume and speed. They have made interaction between distant places cheaper and easier. They have also contributed to an increase in the symbolic density of social life. This has significantly altered the institutional context in which more local or national cultural projects of all kinds develop, and the costs and benefits of national policies of cultural autonomy or political control and censorship.
There exist numerous conceptualizations of globalization. Among these, the views of three schools of thought on globalization are prominent. In what follows, the beliefs of each of these schools of thought regarding the concept of globalization are briefly presented.
3. THE THREE SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ON GLOBILIZATION
As noted in the preceding section, globalization permeates every sphere of human life. Therefore, to fully comprehend its propelling forces and impact, it is imperative to recognize that social, economic, political, cultural, and educational factors play tremendous roles in determining the course of globalization. Over the years various scholars have tried to provide meaningful insights into the causes of globalization. The attempts made by various scholars to isolate the forces of globalization in order to make them easier to comprehend and harness led to the development of different perceptions and views about the meaning of globalization and the factors that drive it. Such discussions are most frequently filled with debates and pronouncements as to what globalization is and whether or not it is intensifying or dissipating over the decades.
Though scholars of globalization agree on the intensification of global interconnectedness, heated debates still rage on—ringing loud through the corridors of conference halls and seminar rooms and on the pages of academic journals, magazines, and books regarding how to conceptualize globalization, its causal dynamics, and how to characterize its imminent short-term impact and long-term implications. The participants of these debates are classified into three different schools of thought, namely the hyperglobalizers, sceptics, and trasnsformationalists. Proponents of each of these schools hold unique and sometimes opposing views on the forces, direction, and implications of globalization for all humanity, especially those in the developing world. In what follows, the views of each of these schools of thought are presented.
3.1. The Hyperglobalizers
The hyperglobalizers believe that contemporary globalization creates a new era in which people from all over the world are continuously subjected to the forces of demand and supply in the global marketplace. In their view, globalization is a reflection of a new era in human history in which “traditional nation-states have become unnatural, even impossible business units in a global economy” (Held et al, 1999, p. 3). The proponents of this view posit and argue further that in a single global market, competition is the major force that propels human progress. To the hyperglobalizers, therefore, the denationalization of economies through transnational production networks, trade, and finance is a result of economic globalization. In the borderless economy, the hyperglobalizers argue, national governments are nothing more than conduits of global capital transfer. They are, however, powerless in most cases as far as the sovereignty of the nation-state is concerned. For example, today, indigenous institutions are being paralyzed by the more powerful local, regional, and global mechanisms of governance. The impersonal market forces are becoming more powerful than states that supposedly wield power—hence losing their relevance, significance, and authority. In the views of the hyperglobalizers, therefore,
The emergence of institutions of global governance, and the global diffusion and hybridization of cultures are interpreted as evidence of a radically new world order, an order which prefigures the demise of the nation-state . . . the conditions facilitating transnational cooperation between peoples, given global infrastructure of communication and increasing awareness of many common interests, have never been so propitious. In this regard, there is evidence of an emerging ‘global civil society (Held et al, 1999, pp. 4-5).
To the hyperglobalizers, therefore, economic globalization continues to create a new division of labor that leads to the polarization between the winners and losers.
3.2. The Trasnsformationalists
The Transformationalists argue that current patterns of globalization are historically unprecedented to such an extent that states and societies all over the world continue to experience tremendous transformations in their attempts to face and also deal with the challenges of an uncertain world. To the trasnsformationalists, the central force behind the rapid social, economic, and political transformations in the world today is globalization. In their views, therefore, the strength and significance of the forces of globalization continue to drag along and also force government leaders and their people to find ways and means whereby they can successfully cope with the forces that continue to erase the glaring distinctions between domestic/internal and international/external affairs.
From this perspective, therefore, the trasnsformationalists maintain that globalization is a powerful force that is continuously shaking the very foundations of social, economic, and political life of people in their own nation-state and/or society. As such, the forces and agents of globalization are now reconstituting and re-engineering the power, functions, and authority of national governments.
3.3. The Sceptics
The sceptics, contrary to the views of the hyperglobalizers, maintain that the idea of globalization is a manufactured myth aimed at obscuring the fact that the international economy is being gradually demarcated into three powerful regional blocks within which national governments still continue to be powerful—Europe, Asia Pacific, and North America. Using statistical data on the flow of world trade, investment, and labor for the nineteenth century as the fact on which to predicate their position, the sceptics maintain that current levels of economic interdependence are not necessarily new and as such are not any different from those known in human history. The sceptics believe, therefore, that new trade data do not necessarily reveal or confirm any new trends. To them, the new historical evidence merely substantiates the increased magnitude of internationalization—nothing more than basic interactions between predominantly national economies. The sceptics argue further that present levels of economic integration are also not ideal. In their view, therefore, the magnitude of contemporary globalization is highly exaggerated. Commenting on the views of the sceptics, Held et al, (1999, p. 5) observed:
In this respect, the sceptics consider the hyperglobalist thesis as fundamentally flawed and also politically naïve since it underestimates the enduring power of national governments to regulate international economic activity. Rather than being out of control, the forces of internationalization themselves depend on the regulatory power of national governments to ensure continuing economic liberalization.
To the sceptics, therefore, the new evidence on economic activity reveals nothing more than the extent to which the global economy is becoming more and more regionalized into three major financial and trading blocks as noted earlier in this section. Unlike the hyperglobalists, the sceptics maintain that governments still have significant powers and authority and as such, are not necessarily passive victims of internationalization. In conclusion, the sceptics believe that the concepts of cultural globalization and global culture are all techniques of propaganda aimed at ensuring the primacy of the West in world affairs. Having thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the positions of the three schools of thought on globalization, Held et al, (1999) argued further that regardless of the intensity of the debates among the proponents and members of these schools, their perspectives reveal certain common conclusions about globalization in terms of conceptualization, causal dynamics, socio-economic consequences, implications for state power and governance, and historical trajectory. Based on the views of the proponents of these schools of thought, Held et al, (1999) derived four types of globalization. These are:
1. Type 1: Thick globalization (i.e., extensive reach of global networks with high intensity, high velocity, and high impact propensity across all facets of social life. 2. Type 2: Diffused globalization (a combination of high extensity, high intensity, and high velocity. These, however, exert low impact propensity). 3. Type 3: Expansive globalization (its characteristics are high intensity of global interconnectedness with low intensity, low velocity, and high impact propensity. Its reach and impact rather than the velocity of flows defines this form of globalization better). 4. Type 4: Thin globalization (i.e., in this type, high extensity of global networks is not matched by similar intensity, velocity or impact. These are usually low in this case).
Based on the thought experiments used to generate these four types of globalization, the authors point out that such a process could generate a range of other possible outcomes—of unlimited nature. Using these observations, the authors argue that globalization is neither a singular condition nor a linear process. It is, therefore, better to think about it as a diverse phenomenon that encompasses every sphere of human life—social, economic, political, cultural, factor movements, and so on. Though these observations and conclusions are meaningful, however, our task in the remainder of this paper is not to determine which of these schools of thought are accurate in their views about globalization. Instead, our goal is to point out that regardless of these conceptions about globalization and its infinite number of trajectories, people who dwell in the poor nation states can successfully re-position themselves to benefit from the forces and agents of contemporary globalization. Let us now turn to this view and flesh it out in detail.
4. IMPLICATIONS OF CONTEMPORARY GLOBALIZATION: A HUMAN FACTOR PERSEPCTIVE
In this section, I present some ideas regarding whether or not the forces of contemporary globalization could lead to either the demise or enhancement of the authority of those who wield state power and the real welfare of the inhabitants of the developing countries.
4.1. The Plight of the Poor and Directions for the Future
Regardless of what one’s views are concerning the full implications of contemporary globalization two key questions arise. These are:
1. Can one successfully argue that the forces and agents of contemporary globalization impose new limits to what the citizens of the developing countries can do to make a successful transition through its prevailing storms and devastations?
2. Is it possible for people living in poor nation states to tame and nurture the forces and agents of globalization to derive the full benefits from their contributions to the various economies of the global village?
To provide answers to these questions, it is imperative to point out that in the presence of severe HF decay (HFD), orthodox policies and programs will never lead to any gains and improvements in the social, economic, and political conditions of the poor people. To Adjibolosoo (2001), HFD
Refers to the phenomenon of negative attitudes, behaviors, and actions as evidenced in personal lack of accountability, integrity, honesty, responsibility, and caring. In its severest form, those who suffer from severe HFD engage in attitudes, behaviors, and actions that are contrary to principle-centeredness, moral injunctions, and ethical standards. People who suffer from this syndrom find it too difficult to make their development plans, policies, programs, and projects to function as effectively as expected. This is the case because these people are usually unable to successfully create, administer, and manage the development program. In addition, the people lack the requisite HF to support continuing economic growth and sustained human-centered development. To minimize problems of underdevelopment a people must begin with the appropriate education and training programs aimed at improving the quality of the HF.
Obviously, orthodox development policies and programs that will always fail in the presence of severe HFD include but not limited to the following:
1. Opening markets in the developing countries to business organizations from the developed countries so they can increase and channel more foreign direct investment into these ailing economies.
2. Intensifying and fostering transnational business activities aimed at the promotion of ongoing economic growth in the poor countries.
3. Encouraging the developing countries to produce and export more primary raw materials to the advanced countries.
4. Integrating the developing countries into global capital markets and also liberalizing their capital accounts.
5. Increasing the stability of financial markets, capital flows, and also stimulating investment and technical progress by promoting financial development in the poor countries.
6. Opening the local financial sector in the developing countries to international capital flows and competition.
7. Giving full access to the people living in the poor nation states so they can acquire a much larger pool of capital with which to finance their local development.
8. Speeding up the process of capital accumulation and the absorption of foreign technologies in the poor nation states.
9. Assisting the developing countries to participate in and also sustain stabilization policies and structural adjustment programs.
10. Promoting and fostering stable global macroeconomic environment.
11. Donating computers to the poor nations and having them properly installed—be they either used or brand new or both. In addition, it is important to increase the activities of the global soup kitchen—providing food aid, disaster relief, and so on.
Fortunately, however, in light of the queries presented above, it is imperative to perceive that there exist two critical activities through which the poor peoples of the world can benefit from globalization. These activities must be engaged in in a simultaneous fashion to successfully harvest the good fruits of globalization.
First, these people must of necessity concentrate on the development and applications of the positive HF. Until this objective is achieved and sustained the people of the developing countries stand little chance of successfully traveling the highway of globalization to wealth-creation through the effective appropriation of their unique niches in the global marketplace. Second, the leaders and intelligentsia of these countries, working hand-in-hand with their citizens, must precisely identify the social, economic, business, and political activities they must engage in to create commodities and services that would command higher marginal utilities and values and, therefore, greater financial remuneration—both at home and abroad.
The people of the poor nation states must of necessity be mindful that when they continue to focus solely on the production of goods and services based on what someone else wants and dictates to them to produce and sell in the global marketplace, they could perpetuate long-term global imbalances in gain sharing. That is, they would not only be saddled with the burden of channeling their scarce resources into producing and exporting raw materials that command little value in the global marketplace, but also be pushed into activities that make them drawers of water and hewers of wood—effectively assisting others to build and furnish their dwellings while they languish at the courts of hunger, disease, and starvation. Worst of all, they would also fail to improve the poor quality of their existing social, economic, and political conditions in the long-term.
Today, people living in different parts of the world and so far away from the location of the headquarters of companies in the industrialized countries are still unable to escape the tentacular influences of the social, economic, and political activities going on in the various marketplaces of the advanced countries and elsewhere in the global village. The people who operate gigantic corporations and their activities directly and indirectly exert tremendous impact on the social, economic, and political lives of the poor. The plight and fate of the poor people, therefore, seem to be intricately and irrevocably intertwined with the fortunes of the owners, shareholders, and stockowners of advanced country corporations. For this reason, the local infrastructure (i.e., communications systems, transportation networks, social organization, indigenous industries, food sources, environment, education, etc.) and economic activities in the poor countries are either being dominated or annihilated. The poor people seem to be losing their abilities and rights to economic survival and self-determination. Similarly, their power base, authority, and the capability to enhance their livelihood and well being are being continuously weakened and eroded away in the long-term.
It is currently evident that for centuries, natural and humanly created phenomena continuously unleash globalizing forces and agents that shape the social, economic, and political lives of all people. The artificial forces are initiated and propelled into motion by and revealed in the attitudes, behaviors, and actions of human beings. Existing national income statistics and financial records of corporations show clearly how the forces and agents of globalization tip the rules and scales of gain sharing in favor of the people in the developed countries. One of the primary reasons why this is the case is that the people of the developed countries do not only lead the way in scientific and technological advancement, but also determine the rules of the game and the positioning of the goalposts. By so doing, the inhabitants of the developing countries do not only feel helpless, but also become convinced that their economies depend solely on those of developed nations and that all they (i.e., the poor people) could do is to straddle along—following the direction of the currents and forces of change released by the people in the advanced countries and doing according to external desires and directives.
After having studied and analyzed the impact of the power, authority, and force of these globalizing agents, it makes intuitive sense to argue that the citizens of the developing countries have no way of successfully participating and benefiting from the forces and agents of globalization. This conclusion, however, does not only create the scary feeling of not being able to improve the conditions of the poor people, but also leads to the perpetual helplessness and hopelessness in these people.
In light of these observations, I argue in the remainder of this paper that through HF development programs, the people of the developing countries stand a greater chance of benefiting from the forces and agents of globalization. It is maintained, however, that calling for, crafting, and signing international conventions alone would do little to improve the ability of people in the developing countries to derive optimal benefits from globalization. Instead, the road to effective emancipation and gain sharing is intensive HF development and strong commitment to getting involved with and engaging people in the developed countries in various human endeavors that could lead to the creation and securing of the sources of the wealth of the poor nation states.
4.2. Human Factor Development: The Only Hope and Road to Emancipation and Gain Sharing
Contemporary globalization, though forging tremendous global transformations, will not necessarily lead to the demise of the nation-state and its power—except in the presence of severe HF decay and/or underdevelopment. The various intergovernmental activities, programs, alliances, and the contributions of members of civil society groups aimed at civilizing and democratizing globalization will fail to accomplish their intended objectives if the appropriate HF is non-existent. From the HF perspective, therefore, it is arguable that the strength and quality of democracy depend more on the quality of the HF of all citizens and everyone else involved in the decision-making process than excellent blueprints of plans, policies, programs, and projects. Though these may be useful, their availability or unavailability is not necessarily the primary source of either bad or good governance in the poor nation states. Similarly, the poor people do not lack social, economic, and political institutions. Instead, every institution the poor people need to enhance their welfare already exists in their nation states. Unfortunately, however, these institutions are unable to achieve their intended objectives because those who lead, manage, and run them suffer from severe HF decay and/or underdevelopment.
From the HF perspective, therefore, the view that the quality of democracy is a function of the public’s deliberation and decision-making process is misleading and deceptive. Anyone who believes that the process of deliberation and decision-making determines the quality of democracy is oblivious to the view that the primary foundation for the success of any human activities, programs, social networks, and institutions (i.e., religious, political, economic, social, etc.) is the quality of the people’s HF (See Adjibolosoo, 1995 and 1998a). Humans create democracy, a social institution. Viewed from this light, democracy has no life of its own. Similarly, the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of any government are direct reflections of the quality of the HF of the people who form the government and its political bureaucracy by which it operates.
Viewed in this light, it stands to reason that if people in the developing countries are interested in enhancing the quality of the due process of democracy and the performance of governmental bureaucracy in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, they must assist every citizen involved in leadership and other vital positions to acquire and exercise trust, responsibility, accountability, integrity, love, caring, and such like. That is, those who desire to improve the performance effectiveness of the democratic process must focus on how to assist everyone to develop the appropriate HF. By working hard in a step-by-step fashion to accomplish this objective, everything else will fall in place in the long-term.
Unfortunately, however, due to the many decades of wrong thinking and theorizing, people in the developing countries have been misled and also wasted precious time and energy hoping that they could reform their governments and their associated mammoth bureaucracies at various levels. Yet regardless of the countless number of attempts they made in the past and still continue to make today to bring democratization and good governance to the developing countries, they have always failed to comprehend that to be successful in reforming any institutions in the developing countries, they must first help these people to improve the quality of their HF without which none of their programs would work as effectively as the people have always hoped for.
In light of this reality, neither the pursuit of laissez fair economic policies, programs, and projects nor democratization nor empowerment nor girl-child education would enhance the gain people could receive from globalization in the developing countries. Instead, it is the quality of the HF of people that makes the primary difference as far as welfare enhancement is concerned. That is, in the presence of well-developed HF, the people of the developing countries would be better prepared to tame and nurture the forces of globalization to their best advantage. Based on this conclusion, Wriston’s (1974) perspective on the significance of the quality person in running programs, institutions, cities, and business ventures is right on. Writing on this issue, Wriston (1974, p. 16) observed:
I believe that the only game in town is the personnel game. If you have the right person in the right place, you don’t have to do anything else. If you have the wrong person in the job, there’s no management system known to man than can save you…. Basically, if the fellow you have running London is a highly intelligent and charged up person, with brains and judgment, he will do a fantastic job. If he is dumb and lazy, you can write him all the memos you want and nothing will happen.
Those who recognize and understand better this view have a much greater chance of positioning their plans, policies, programs, and projects to achieve their intended objectives than their counterparts who do not. Without any doubts and questions, Wriston’s (1974) view reveals that in the absence of the right caliber of people who are willing and ready to take charge and function effectively and efficiently, no institutions, organizations, businesses, cities, societies, and nations will function and remain functional as expected over time. Truly, it is people, who are able to successfully create, implement, establish, and operate responsibility centers that make sustained progress happen in the nation state.
4.3. Setting Up and Operating Responsibility Centers
In the search for techniques and procedures through which the poor people could tame and benefit from the forces and agents of globalization, it is imperative to recognize that a certain preliminary program of activities has to be initiated and implemented. First and foremost, it is critical to set up appropriate educational and training programs aimed at developing the positive HF. The individuals in charge of the whole operation must select people with well-developed HF and set them in unique groups—responsibility centers (RCs). Members of each group must elect one of their own to serve as the leader and/or manager. Each of these groups must be viewed as a vital nerve center for the whole nation. A responsibility center is usually constituted of a team of quality, knowledgeable, and skilled people with a set person who is fully responsible for all the activities of the group (See Anthony and Herzlinger, 1975, pp. 17-18). Within each responsibility center are units, sections, departments, branches, and divisions. Members of each of these responsibility centers are assigned specific tasks that must be performed simultaneously toward the accomplishment of the intended goals and objectives. Anthony and Herzlinger (1975, p. 17) noted that:
Except for those at the bottom of the organization, these responsibility centers consist of aggregations of smaller responsibility centers. The entire organization is itself a responsibility center. One function of top management is to plan, coordinate, and control the work of all these responsibility centers; this is the management control function.
In the developing country set up, a specific responsibility center must concentrate on and accomplish critical objectives that are required for the whole population to benefit from the forces and agents of globalization. Whatever the members of each responsibility center do must be viewed as necessary but not sufficient alone in itself for the whole nation to successfully harness and civilize the forces of globalization. It is important that the overall objectives of the nation state be outlined and popularized right from the outset by the leaders and people acting together as one unit.
These responsibility centers must concentrate on social, economic, and political activities through which the citizens of the nation state could create commodities and services of tremendous social, economic, business, and political value to their own citizens and people from other nations—both developed and developing countries.
At the initial stages, the pursuit of these activities must be based on the principle of least cost and locally available technology. Appropriate, affordable, and sound foreign scientific practices and technology must be brought in as the need arises. The primary reason is that such activities would be easier for the inhabitants of the developing countries to engage in without having to be faced with tremendous costs and advanced technologies they may neither afford nor successfully use.
Using these conclusions as springboards and also taking into account the social, economic, and political activities in the global economy, the people of the poor nation states could develop and engage in unique value creating activities and services in which they process tremendous comparative advantage. Areas of great significance in the creation and development of responsibility centers could include but not limited to the following:
1. Developing the appropriate human factor.
2. Producing staples and other products for domestic consumption.
3. Selecting and developing indigenous technology foundries charged with the primary task of evolving relevant scientific and technological methods and also applying their inventions and innovations to produce goods and services to meet local needs in the short-term and external demand in the long-term (See details in Adjibolosoo, 1996, pp. 39-59).
4. Getting into key international sporting and athletic events (e.g., golf, basketball, baseball, cricket, soccer, football, etc.) and competing effectively so as to share in the windfall gains associated with these activities.
5. Initiating and promoting value creating cross-cultural touristic activities and successfully marketing these to the local people as well as global tourists.
6. Forging internal and external piecemeal integration (See Adjibolosoo, 1998b, pp. 131-150).
7. Creating, for example, documentary films on indigenous music, drama, drumming, and dancing and making these products available to everyone who desires it in the global marketplace.
8. Setting up and operating local and national dance troupes whose services would be patronized locally and internationally.
9. Developing social, economic, and political infrastructure required for progress to take place in the long-term.
However, a people’s ability to tame the forces and agents of globalization is determined by the extent to which they can effectively and efficiently apply their HF to create, develop, perfect, and use social, economic, business, political, and environmental action programs—cultural practices—to their best advantage. The achievement of this objective requires knowledge, understanding, and wisdom that are necessary for the initiation and establishment of certain areas of excellence (i.e., the actual comparative advantages enshrined in the members of each responsibility center) that would be of tremendous interest to the people of the advanced countries. Unfortunately, however, in the midst of severe HF decay, the people of the developing countries stand to lose from the forces and agents of globalization in the long-term.
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND PROPOSITIONS FOR POLICY
As far as the social, economic, and political problems of the poor people are concerned, whether or not one believes in the reality of the forces and agents of contemporary globalization is irrelevant. One thing that is true, though, is that the poor people continue to suffer from hunger, starvation, disease, hopelessness, and helplessness. The social, economic, and political forces that shape life in the advanced countries also continue to impact the welfare of the poor people in the developing countries. Since these forces seem to be acting like unstoppable military troupes that are on the match to conquer and subdue enemy forces, the poor people, given the current condition and plight of their HF, cannot easily halt the moment-by-moment advances of the agents and forces of globalization. Fortunately, however, the poor people can develop the requisite ability to harness, tame, and harvest the fruits of contemporary globalization. The way to go about doing so is to begin with appropriate programs aimed at continuing development of the positive human factor.
In addition to human factor development, the pursuit and incorporation of the following testable propositions into policies, plans, programs, and projects is imperative. Deeper insights into the significance of each of these propositions would lead the poor people to build their own unique ladders through which they can also climb to the top of the tree of contemporary globalization to harvest some of its desirable fruits to enhance their social, economic, and political welfare.
1. Without making the conscious and calculated effort to channel sufficient human energy and financial resources into the development of the positive human factor, people in the poor nation states stand a greater chance of losing out as the forces and agents of contemporary globalization sip deeper into and permeate their social, economic, and political activities.
2. By not blindly following policy and program recommendations of the people from the advanced countries but thoroughly studying, investigating, and understanding their long-term implications, the inhabitants of the developing countries could successfully discover their real strengths and weaknesses and then act together to discover and work to their greatest advantage the economic and business activities of those in charge of their responsibility centers.
3. No people from the poor nation states can derive any benefits from the forces and agents of globalization by being forced to serve as conduits for what goes on in terms of social, economic, and political progress in the developed nations. Instead, the people who stand the greater chance of successfully transitioning through the transformative waves of globalization are those who relentlessly hone their positive human factor as they work to master the fundamentals of how to compete effectively in the global marketplace.
4. Those who know precisely what their needs, strengths, and weaknesses are and are willing and ready to work toward the transformation of their weaknesses into strengths and lacks into plenty have the capability to work around their existing hindrances and difficulties to improve their own social, economic, and political life.
By incorporating these propositions into public policy—social, economic, and political—and doing exactly as they suggest, the leaders of the developing countries stand a much better chance of taking their nations on to higher levels of progress over time. They would also be positioned to successfully harvest some of the fruits of contemporary globalization. Any other development activities that fail to take the wisdom embedded in each of these propositions into account would lead to long-term failures as have been the real life experience from the distant past to the present. In truth, the inability to focus on and develop the positive human factor is an excellent recipe for continuing retrogression and total failure in the long-term. In this regard, there would be little hope for the poor people as far as deriving benefits from globalization is concerned.
NOTES
1. In this paper my use of the phrase, poor people, to denote the developing countries does not imply that there are no poor people in the developed world. Neither does it connote the view that there are no rich people in the developing world. Instead, since development assistance most frequently flows from the developed to the developing countries, the phrase, poor people, refers to people who receive various types of help from the inhabitants of the developed world. This explanation also holds true for the phrase, poor nation states.
2. The inspiration for this paper is drawn from my detailed review of the work of Held et al, (1999). In this paper, I draw extensively on the research of these scholars as far as the meaning of globalization is concerned. Moreover, their research, a synthesized multidisciplinary work, presents some interesting seminal ideas on the concept, forces, and impact of globalization.
3. See other definitions for globalization in Modelski, 1972; Giddens, 1990; Ohmae, 1990 and 1995; McFail and Goldeier, 1992; Wriston, 1992; Redwood, 1993; Gill, 1995; Guehenno, 1995; Hirst and Thompson, 1996; Amin, 1997; and Rosenau, 1997.
4. Some of the leaders of this school of thought on globalization include Gray (1998); Greider (1997); Albrow (1996); Strange (1996); Cox (1996 and 1997); Gill (1995); Ohmae (1995); Guehenno (1995); Wriston (1992); Reich (1991); Luard (1990).
5. Contributors to this school of thought include Giddens (1990); Rosenau (1990); Scholte (1993); Cammilleri and Falk (1992); Linklater and MacMillan (1995); Castells (1996); and Sassen (1996).
6. Among the scholars who advocate the skeptical thesis are: Weiss (1998); Hirst (1997); Boyer and Drache (1996); Hirst and Thompson (1996); Krugman (1996); Ruigrok and Tulder (1995); Gilpin (1987);
7. It is not surprising to recognize that Africa is not listed in this enumeration. This omission is a precise illustration of the belief most Western scholars, politicians, businessmen and women hold as to the irrelevance of the African continent in terms of the contributions Africans can make to the process of globalization. Worst of all, it also reveals the unspoken conclusion that Africans are unable to derive any significant benefits from globalization.
8. These policy and program suggestions appear in Aninat (2002) as well as in many neoclassical economic discussions on the role of free markets in economic development. Unfortunately, the developing countries have tried most of these policies and program with dismal results to date. That is, these policies and programs have led to absolutely no known sustained positive results as far as the social, economic, and political conditions in the poor countries are concerned.
9. These changes are usually initiated in the foreign policies of the developed countries. In certain cases, policy changes desired by the advanced countries are forced on the developing countries through tied aid programs, the voices of civil society leaders and their members, bilateral and multilateral agreements, the crafting and signing of international conventions, and so on. See examples of such international conventions in US Congress (1991); UN (1998); UNEP (1993); UNFPA (1994); and UNHCR (1993 and 1994).
10. As I proceed to discuss ideas regarding how the poor people could benefit from globalization, I must point out that I do not believe that in the post-modern era knowledge and science will maintain and even strengthen the role of the nation state in world competition and global politics. Whether or not the nation state will fight for the control of information as they did in the past to gain control over territories as argued by Lyotard (1984, p. 5) is irrelevant. I am, however, convinced that in the presence of severe HF decay, a people’s ability to derive gains from globalization will not be enhanced by merely acquiring more knowledge/information and the necessary skills to practice science. In the past, it was this view and many others like it that led to the design of misguided educational programs for the poor people—especially those in African countries. Over six decades now, people from the developing countries still reap the negative fruits of and also suffer from the outcomes of the policies aimed at transporting educational and training programs ditto ditto from the advanced countries. Rather than channel their scarce resources into pursuing knowledge acquisition and science at this point in time, I argue that the people from the developing countries would be far better off if they concentrate on HF development at the present moment. Over time, a people with well-developed HF would be capable of generating, learning, acquiring, and borrowing the necessary information they need to improve their standard of living and welfare. Above all, a people who possess the necessary HF will also have the required capability and knowledge to practice and benefit from science.
11. See Walter Wriston, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Citicorp, the holding company for First National City Bank. An interview reported in The Harbus News (April 4, 1974) (Quoted in Anthony and Herzelinger, 1974, p. 16).
12. This view does not endorse the belief that the poor people must engage in and tie their scarce resources to the production of raw materials to service industrial and economic activities in the advanced countries. Instead, through their own responsibility centers, the people from the poor nation states must identify activities and services they believe they do not only have resources to engage in, but also have the capability to effectively compete against their counterparts in the developed countries. When they are successful in doing so, they would avoid the danger of being forced into business and economic activities that have limited potentials for the creation of significant values added.
REFERENCE
Adjibolosoo, S. 1995. The Human Factor in Developing Africa. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1996. “Enhancing the Efficiency and Performance of Indigenous Industrial Technology Transfer Foundries and Centers.” Review of Human Factor Studies, 2 (2): 39-59, 1996.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1998a. Global Development the Human Factor Way. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1998b. “Achieving a Cooperative Integration in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Voluntary Piecemeal Harmonization Process.” In S. Adjibolosoo and B. Ofori-Amoah, eds. Addressing Misconceptions About Africa’s Development: Seeing Beyond the Veil. Lewiston: The Edwin Mellen Press (pp. 131-150).
Albrow, M. 1996. The Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Amin, S. 1997. Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. London: Zed Press.
Aninat, E. 2002. “Surmounting the Challenges of Globalization.” Finance and Development, 39 (1), http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2002/03/aninat.htm
Boughton, J. M. 2002. “Globalization and the Silent Revolution of the 1980s.” 39 (1): http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2002/03/hausler.htm
Boyer, R. and Drache, D. (eds.). States Against Markets. London: Routledge.
Cammilleri, J. A. and Falk, J. 1992. The End of Sovereignty? The Politics of Shrinking and Fragmented World. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
Carr, E. H. 1981. The Twenty Years Crisis 1919-1939. London: Papermac.
Castells, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cox, R. 1997. “Economic Globalization and the Limits to Liberal Democracy.” In A. G. McGrew, ed. The Transformation of Democracy? Globalization and Territorial Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cox, R. 1996. “Globalization, Multilateralism and Democracy.” In R. Cox, ed. Approaches to World Order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giddens, A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gill, S. 1995. “Globalization, Market Civilization, and Disciplinary Neoliberalism.” Millennium, 24.
Gilpin, R. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Gray, J. 1998. False Dawn. London: Granta.
Greider, W. 1997. One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Guehenno, J. M. 1995. The End of the Nation-State. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Haüsler, G. 2002. “The Globalization of Finance.” Finance and Development, 39 (1): http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2002/03/hausler.htm
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., and Perraton, J. 1999. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Hirst, P. and Thompson, G. 1996. Globalization in Question: The International Economy and the Possibilities of Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Linklater, A. and MacMillan, J. 1995. “Boundaries in Question.” In J. MacMillan and A. Linklater, eds. Boundaries in Question. London: Francis Pinter.
Lyotard, J-F. 1984. The Postmodern Conditions: A report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
Luard, E. 1990. The Globalization of Politics. London: MacMillan.
McFail, M. and Goldeier, J. M. 1992. “A Tale of Two Worlds: Core and Periphery in the Post-Cold War Era.” International Organization, 46.
Modelski, G. 1972. Principles of World Politics. New York: Free Press.
Ohmae, K. 1995. The End of the Nation State. New York: Free Press.
Ohmae, K. 1990. The Borderless World. London: Collins.
Redwood, J. 1993. The Global Marketplace. London: HarperCollins.
Reich, R. 1991. The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for Twenty-First Century Capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Rosenau, J. 1997. Along the Domestic-Foreign Frontier. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ruigrok, W. and Tulder, R. van. 1995. The Logic of International Restructuring. London: Routledge.
Sassen, S. 1996. Losing Control? Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.
Scholte, J. A. 1993. International Relations of Social Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Strange, S. 1996. The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. Cambridge University Press.
UN. 1988. Human Rights: A Compilation of International Instruments. New York: United Nations.
UNEP. 1993. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development —Volumes 1, 2, and 3. New York: United Nations.
UNFPA. 1994. The State of the World’s Population. New York: United Nations Fund for Population Activities.
UNHRC. 1993. Populations of Concern of Concern to UNHCR. Geneva: United Nations High Commission for Refugees.
UNHRC. 1994. The State of the World’s Refugees: The Challenge of Protection. New York: Penguin.
US Congress—Office of Technology Assessment. 1991. Arms Trade 1991. Washington, D C: USGPO.
US Department of Commerce. 1972. Historical Statistics of the United Nations: From Colonial Times to 1970. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce.
Weiss, L. 1998. State Capacity: Governing the Economy in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Wriston, W. 1992. The Twilight of Sovereignty. New York: Charles Scribners Sons.
Navigation
