Hey Benjamin (:
Here are some questions relating to the article on "The Double Edge of Globalisation" :
1. In your opinion, was there equal emphasis on the pros and cons of globalisation by the author? Why and why not?
2. Do you agree with this statement "Instead, the most important factor in determining the amount of investment was the size of the local market."? (Paragraph 3)
3. "It has also been found that within a given industry, foreign-operated plants tended to pollute less than local peers." Is this statement justifiable? Why and why not? (Paragraph 3)
4. What are your opinions on this statement "But they rightly point out that globalisation does serve as both a conduit and an accelerator for many of the forces that cause the loss of forest cover worldwide."?
5. Is it only global cooperations that have bad environmental habits? Or does it apply to the public as well?
Cheers!
Very fine questions, Chelsea. I look forward to Benjamin's answers.
ReplyDeleteOne minor spelling issue is with "cooperations"; it should be corporations.
Also, I'd write "why, or why not?"
Thanks!
Hi Chelsea! These questions are really difficult! You can find my answers below, I tried my best in answering them:
ReplyDelete1. The author focused more on the consequences brought about by globalization. He has done so through the vast use of examples reinforcing the environmental issues and problems which are facilitated by globalization. This is seen in the case of China, being a global consumer and producer of goods and services, has caused extensive deforestation and air pollution globally. Another factor is the lack of compliance and resolution of states and global institutions in tackling the consequences of globalization, seen from the example of US refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol and the UN failing to rally countries to tackle global environmental issues.
2. This is true to a large extent for the underlying reason is the expansion of international trade brought about by globalization. Under such circumstances, multinational companies are mainly driven by economic interests and are only focused on tapping into the expanding international trade to rake in large amounts of revenue. Many companies are taking this opportunity invest in East Asian countries because of their large local markets and increasing demand for goods and services. However, this is not to downplay other factors such as weak environmental regulations and low production costs that greatly influence the investment decisions of multinational companies.
3. I believe this is statement is justifiable to a large extent. While it is true that governance on both the local and global level is unable to successfully promote environmentally friendly practices in factories and plants, the state ultimately holds the power in exerting influence on companies within its state boundaries and is concerned more about protecting the domestic industries as compared to foreign companies. Stricter regulations are therefore imposed upon foreign-operated plants for them to pollute less or risk being forced out of the country which will cause huge economic losses for the multinational companies. On the other hand, it is in the state’s interests to aid in the development of locally operated plants by imposing lax regulations to allow them to eventually expand into overseas markets and boost the state economy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete-continued-
ReplyDelete4. Globalization has indeed facilitated and quickened processes that lead to widespread deforestation, and consequently, the loss of forest cover worldwide. The concept of time-space compression articulated by David Harvey is a result of globalization, where it has allowed goods and services to move beyond borders with ease and at rapid speeds. This has led to an expansion in international trade coupled with the increase in global consumption. Additionally, globalization has allowed information and ideas to be easily spread worldwide. All these factors result in a race between multinational companies, empowered with the ability and advanced technologies, to expand beyond state boundaries at will contribute to the loss of forest cover worldwide.
However, traditional agricultural methods have also led to the loss of forest cover worldwide. Shifting cultivation employed by native farmers involve the burning of forests to provide nutrients required for the growth of crops. These practices still continue today in regions that have not experienced globalization and will continue to contribute to the removal of forest cover worldwide.
5. Global corporations are not the only culprits having bad environmental habits. This certainly applies to the public as well. In this sense, Individuals who possess bad environmental habits are those who fail to comply with the regulations imposed by the state or global institutions with regards to the environment. Likewise in countries where development is still slow, citizens who are unable to have access to forms of information and communication technologies are unaware of the threat and scale of environmental problems. Take the case of the Sumatra Haze for example, the traditional farmers who are resistant and ignorant to the forces of globalization stick to the illegal method of slash-and-burn in crop cultivation, thereby contributing to massive deforestation and air pollution in the region.
Thanks!