Development from the Bottom up: Moving beyond Neoliberalism and Neocolonialism

“If I didn’t define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people’s fantasies for me and eaten alive.” – Audre Lorde

The Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation (BIGUF) holds a march on International Women’s Day 2015.
The Bangladesh Independent Garment Workers Union Federation (BIGUF) holds a march on International Women’s Day 2015.

The histories of both the Development Project and the Globalization Project have been built upon Western notions of a “good society.” Notions which are driven by global capital and leave little room for issues of justice or human need. Today, this image of a “good society,” is systematized into the workings of neoliberal capitalism, which through coercive means, draw underdeveloped countries into unequal market relations with developed countries, opening borders to capital at the cost of working peoples’ lives. Such a system disproportionately benefits Western transnational corporations and a small number of owning-class elites in developing countries. Hence, development today operates in the form of neocolonialism. Even though this form of global capitalism has brought wretched conditions to working people globally, the same neoliberal ideology persists in development theory and practice today, such as with Microcredit programs and trade policies like the Trans Pacific Partnership.

This blog will focus on alternatives to neoliberal development by challenging the broader concept of “development” under capitalism. My case studies will explore development from the bottom up, to show that the only way we can achieve just societies is through the self-determination of working people. Development cannot continue as a way to deepen the systems of neoliberalism, nor can it return to the practices of the Development Project which left working people in developing countries exploited by their own states and corporations (Chibber 2015: 81-87). The primary focus of bottom up development will be in economic terms, specifically focusing on workers, for two reasons. First, as Chandra Mohanty notes, because “capital as it functions now depends on and exacerbates racist, patriarchal, and heterosexist relations of rule,” (Mohanty 2003: 231) and many of these hierarchal systems must be fought through economic means. Secondly, I believe that workers have a point of leverage in their ability to halt the accumulation of profits by transnational corporations and International financial Institutions via strikes and slowdowns, which enables workers to leverage drastic changes in the material conditions their lives (Chibber 2016). Development from the bottom up centralizes marginalized people in development countries in their own process of “developing.”

The first section of my blog will focus on global attempts to establish cooperative economies as a way to mitigate the conditions of capitalism. There are a number of debates on the possibilities and strategies of developing cooperative economies, as well as organizations attempting to aid workers in starting cooperatives. The “Pathways to a cooperative Market Economy,” a part of Verso books’ “Real Utopias Project” is engaging with cooperatives at an academic level, attempting to develop strategies for cooperative development. Pathways has so far hosted conferences in Barcelona and Buenos Aires, and are preparing for upcoming conferences in Johannesburg in 2016 and Italy in 2017. Other organizations such as “US Overseas Cooperative Development Council”  have helped cooperatives with management strategies and “The Working World” has attempted to finance new co-ops through non-extractive loans in Argentina, Nicaragua and the United States. Although the creation of cooperatives is necessary, the viability of coops as system changing remains questionable. As of yet, there are few examples of co-ops accounting for large sections of economic activity (Gindin 2016). Additionally, issues of co-op competition with capitalist firms can restrict co-op success and may result in negative conditions such as worker self-exploitation (Luxemburg 1909: 41-43).

The constraints of co-ops taken into account, the second section of my blog will focus on worker action in capitalist firms in the Third World/South (Mohanty 2003: 222-228). Worker mobilization in the developing world, and international labor solidarity, has the ability to change the immediate conditions of workers who exercise militancy, as well as on other workers within a country due to the rippling effects of worker resistance. A key to investigating this activity will be to look for worker struggles from the most marginalized groups, usually poor women in the Third World/South, so I can create a more inclusive image of bottom up development (Mohanty 2003: 231). This work will focus on the struggles of female Bangladeshi garment workers, the recent strike wave in China, and the struggles of the Zapatistas in Chiapas Mexico for autonomy and gender equality.

Development is not something that can be brought to a group of marginalized people. Instead, liberation and justice must be fought for by the marginalized peoples themselves, with solidarity from others, for marginalized people are the only groups who know what is necessary for their own lives. Development from the bottom up, as forms of social struggle, are the only we can live in a globalized society free of economic, gender, race, and other social inequalities. This blog will reframe development, stripping it of its neocolonial legacy, through the stories and struggles of the most marginalized people globally.

 

Bibliography

Andalusia Knoll and Itandehui Reyes, “From Fire to Autonomy: Zapatistas, 20 Years of Walking Slowly,” Truthout, January 25, 2014.

Chandra Mohanty, “ ‘Under Western Eyes’ Revisited: Feminist Solidarity through Anticapitalist Struggles,” in Feminism Without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity (Durham: Duke University Press, 2003).

Jane Slaughter, “Review: Behind China’s Wildcat Strike Wave,” Labor Notes, October 15, 2014.

Milford Bateman, “The Power of a Dollar: Microcredit is nothing more than a socially validated way for financial elites to exploit the poor,” Jacobin 19 (Fall 2015): 9-19.

“Pathways to a cooperative Market Economy,” https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/Cooperative-pathways.htm.

“The Real Utopias Project,” http://www.versobooks.com/series_collections/2-the-real-utopias-project.

Rosa Luxemburg, “Cooperative, Unions, Democracy,” in Reform or Revolution. 1909. Reprint, (New York: Pathfinder, 1970), 41-43.

Sam Gindin, “Chasing utopia: Worker ownership and cooperative will not succeed by competing on capitalism’s terms,” Jacobin, March 10, 2016.

“US Overseas Cooperative Development Council,” http://www.ocdc.coop/.

Tula Connell, “Bangladesh Women Workers Increasingly Empowered,” http://www.solidaritycenter.org/bangladesh-women-workers-increasingly-empowered/.

Vivek Chibber, “Development From Below: Capitalists are interested in profit, not development. Only workers can empower the Global South,” Jacobin 19 (Fall 2015): 81-87.

Vivek Chibber, “Why the Working Class?,” Jacobin, March 13, 2016.

“The Working World,” http://www.theworkingworld.org/us/.

Feminization of Poverty in Pakistan

The feminization of poverty is shown in how women represent higher percentages of the world’s poverty. It is essentially an intersection between gender and socioeconomic class. In fact, 70% of the 1.3 billion people living in poverty are women. While feminized poverty exists all over the world, for this post I would like to focus on Pakistan, where it is quite prevalent.

In Pakistan, the feminization of poverty is perpetuated by a number of factors. One, very prevalent factor being education. In fact, a 2011 Human Development Report from the Development Project stated that in Pakistan, approximately twice as many males than females receive secondary education. With less educated women unable to receive high paying jobs along with some prominent patriarchal values, it can be very difficult for Pakistani women to find higher paying work.

Often many of the women in poverty are widows. Additionally, in many of these cases these women have children that they will struggle to provide for. Another cause of feminized poverty in Pakistan is something called Bonded Labor. Bonded labor is a form of slavery. Many women in Pakistan are bonded laborers because they are so far in debt that it is their only option. These people are forced life on very little and work long, laborious hours.

There are several groups and organizations in Pakistan working to help get these women out of poverty and on their feet. For example, I found an organization called the Kashf Foundation. It is a Pakistani microfinance organization that lends small amounts of money to poor women to start their own businesses. The Kashf Foundation lends money to women in groups of 25. These women then guarantee each other’s debts and then will meet every two weeks where they will make payments and discuss social issues, typically surrounding women’s rights. This foundation was created in order to empower women.

While there are many forces working against Pakistani women, there are more and more organizations and groups working towards helping these women make livable wages.

 

Works Cited

Beijing 5 – Women 2000: Gender Equality, Development and Peace for the 21st Century Twenty-third special session of the General Assembly, 5-9 June 2000. (n.d.). Retrieved March 17, 2016, from http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/followup/session/presskit/fs1.htm

Brick kiln workers: The endless battle. (n.d.). Retrieved March 18, 2016, from http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/brick-kiln-workers-the-endless-battle/

Feminization of Poverty. (2012, May 22). Retrieved March 18, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7E47MUiCLM

McMichael, P. (2000). Development and social change: A global perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

(2009). The Women’s Crusade. Retrieved March 16, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/magazine/23Women-t.html

Introduction: What did globalization bring to Thailand?

“Should I support globalization?”

Since I read many articles and learned deeply about globalization in lectures, this question always arises in my mind.

Globalization generates international cooperation in economics, politics, ideas, cultural values, and the exchange of knowledge. The essential idea in globalization is free transfer of capital, goods, and services across national frontiers. Thus, it reduces the reduction of the import and export restrictions and allows company to exchange products and services without import and export restrictions. Therefore, the consumers can gain their products with higher quality and better prices. In addition, Manufactures of transnational corporations (TNCs) produce a lot of job opportunities in the Third World. Finally, globalization allows the free movement of labor. The benefit of this is filling the staffs shortages in institutions such as hospital and nursing homes.

According to Hancock, in contrast,“Banerjee and Linstead argue that process of globalization is an extension of modern capitalism, and a process that continues the development of First World nations, through the exploitation ( in part) of the Third World. “ In fact, globalization also provides low-wage labors, poor working conditions, and discrimination against women in the Third World countries.

I found a good example, Thailand, which is the country experienced both the positive and negative impacts of globalization in the past 20 years. The amount of foreign direct investment into Thailand skyrocketed in the latter half of the 1980s, and the Thai economy grew at an unprecedentedly high rate. However, the financial and currency crisis in 1997 changed such trends drastically. Short-term investment deserted Thailand in a very short period of time. The price of real estate and stocks nosedived, and a large number of bank and financial companies went bankrupt.

The following blog posts will attempt to analyze the globalization and crisis in Thailand, and I hope I can finally decide whether I support globalization or not.

References:

*Hancock, P. (2015, December 04). Export Processing Zones (EPZs), globalisation, feminised labour markets and working conditions: A study of Sri Lankan EPZ workers.

*Globalization Pros and Cons List. (2014). Retrieved March 19, 2016, from http://occupytheory.org/globalization-pros-and-cons-list/

*Jonathan E. Leightner. (1999). Globalization and Thailand’s Financial Crisis. Journal of Economic Issues, 33(2), 367–373. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4227448

 

 

Introduction to Climate Change and Inequality

Climate change is one of our planet’s biggest issues at the moment and it is an issue that many scientists are studying to get a better grasp on what to expect and how to lessen the impact. For this blog series I want to focus on climate change and how it has been resulting in social inequality. At first glance climate change seems to be affecting those who just happen to be in the region where impacts randomly strike, but there is clear evidence of a social divide of who it impacts the most.

All over the place I am hearing and reading about how climate change is going to hit the world’s poorest the hardest. This is because near the equator, where most developing countries are located, is where climate change will bring about desertification, more intense storms, and a higher sea level rise. In a region where there isn’t always the economic and technical progress to deal with such issues it will be hard if not impossible for these people to overcome the struggles that will occur.

I think this topic of climate change and social inequality is interesting because it is a major pressing issue that the world is facing today. It is often overlook compared to the threatening issue of climate change in and of itself, but inequality is and will become more of a direct result of climate change that should be studied in an attempt to help those in most need.

One of the major issues behind this inequality is the third worlds desire for the first world to pay for its effects. The first world countries are the ones abusing carbon emissions and impacting climate change the most and third world countries like Bangladesh and the Philippines don’t have the economy to support the drastic impacts climate change has been having on their country. (NY TIMES)

Chapter Six of Benchmarking Working Europe sums up the issues in a clear way with one statistic: “As the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has pointed out, while Africa accounts for less than 4 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, this continent may well, as early as 2020, have between 70 million and 400 million people exposed to water shortage caused by climate change. This shows the other dimension of inequality, in terms of exposure to the impact of climate change” (Benchmarking Working Europe).

Mail & Guardian is a South African newspaper publisher who recently discussed climate change and points out that capital is the real geological force behind climate change (M&G). This is the unfortunate realistic truth in our society today. Money is the determining factor when it comes to making a lot of decisions. “Driven by the need to make short-term profits, capital, through its organization of production, distribution, consumption and social life, has overshot planetary limits, undermined natural cycles and now threatens human beings with extinction by means of climate change” (M&G).

I also found a report that the World Bank published that brings up the topic of ways we can prevent drastic impacts of climate change and inequality. Later on in this blog series I would like to narrow in on this idea of finding a solution because all too often we just hear about the issue and the problems it causes without learning about ways to solve it. (WorldBank.org)

Works Cited

“6/Climate Change and Inequality.” Benchmarking Working Europe. Brussels: ETUI-REHS, 2012. N. pag. Print.

“The Climate Is Ripe for Social Change.” The M&G Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.

“The Inequality of Climate Change.” Economix The Inequality of Climate Change Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.

“What Climate Change Means for Africa, Asia and the Coastal Poor.” World Bank. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Mar. 2016.

 

How Much of Social Inequality is the result of Globalization?

With the Development Project coming to an end, the path of Globalization seemed like the most natural course of effects, elevating development from nationwide to worldwide progression. That, along with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, left western Capitalism as the dominant form of economic progress in the world. As a result, Communism and the Development State were eventually replaced with a neoliberal form of free-trade market, one that advocated businesses to balance the rights and interests of both the individual and the community. However, as economic progress became more profound, it was paralleled by a decline in class structure and social inequality amongst the Third World population that the economy is supposed to represent. Through this blog, I will take a look at both the helpful and harmful aspects of Globalization and its impact on the Third World in order to determine just how much about it has led to the current state of its social and economic issues.

 

The sad fact of the matter is that in the world market, there can never be equal winners amongst those seeking to further their nation’s economic power. This is basic human nature, with competition driving us to work harder against one another in order to prevail. However, unlike First World nations, whose large economies allow them to purchase better assets for success, Third World governments are usually less fortunate, carrying resources and manpower but unable to balance this with the ability to cater to their people’s needs. As a result of weak incomes and poor education for the lower/middle classes, only the small percentage of rich citizens are left with the ability to make and exploit economic opportunities. The rest of the country is left in a state of poverty and forced to work for low pay in the same industries meant to “benefit” the country. Does that mean that every Third World government is falling under this category? Not entirely, but their desire to match the economic ranks of their western counterparts tends to leave them indifferent to the issues of their own population, should they not reside within the upper class minority.

 

Ironically, despite failing to support the communities dependent on its economic success, at the very root of Globalization is an ideology centered around an idea that the market is capable of resolving just about anything. Known as market fundamentalism, this ideology persists that a free market is capable of solving any social and economic problems that a nation may face, and that growth through deregulation and privatization will be able to increase everyone’s welfare. Any form of interference against this belief and the market in general should be seen as a threat to the social well being of everyone involved, and thus must be avoided altogether (Mander/Baker/Korten 2001). Furthermore, market fundamentalism believes that increasing foreign investment in Third World countries will lead to an increase in productive capacities and development, something that should benefit the well being of lower class citizens. Unfortunately, the reality remains that this ideology is ridiculously naïve, with the only people benefitting from it being the companies and corporations that produce the nation’s exports.

 

Now is globalization always the direct cause behind social inequality in developing nations? That is hard to say, as despite a lot of problems understandably being traced back to Globalization, there are still some good things that have come out of the process. After all, similar to the Development Project, the idea of Globalization was created with genuine intentions of expanding the market to everyone who wanted to be a part of it, even if it was partially to benefit the economic power of the West. According to notes recorded on the effects of Globalization in India and China, globalization has not only opened up numerous job opportunities for workers struggling for employment, due to the restructuring of the economy from agricultural to industrial workforce (Bardhan 2007). In a weird way, Globalization led to a reduction in Third World poverty, even if the treatment of its workers is not usually the best. While it’s hard to separate the negative effects of Globalization from the positive ones, it would be wrong to assume that everything about Globalization is one hundred percent awful.

References

Bardhan, Pranab. “Inequality in India and China: Is Globalization to Blame?” Inequality In India And China: Is Globalization To Blame? October 15, 2007. Accessed March 19, 2016. http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/inequality-india-and-china-globalization-blame.

Birdsall, Nancy. “Global Policy Forum.” Globalization Will Increase Inequality. February 28, 2006. Accessed March 19, 2016. https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/218/46552.html.

Mander, Jerry, Debi Baker, and David Korten. “Does Globalization Help the Poor?” Http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com. 2001. Accessed March 19, 2016. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Globalization/DoesGlobaliz_HelpPoor.html.

Pologeorgis, Nicolas. “How Globalization Affects Developed Countries | Investopedia.” Investopedia. 2010. Accessed March 19, 2016. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/10/globalization-developed-countries.asp.

 

South Korea: An Economic Development Success Story?

As a development scholar, my primary interest resides within the influence of international trade on developing economies from a financial and humanitarian standpoint. The following blog posts will attempt to analyze examples of this dynamic by taking a closer look at case studies of developing economies that rely heavily upon exports, imports, or both. First, we will examine a success story of the rapidly developing country of South Korea throughout the past several decades and how it was able to successfully utilize its export-centered economy in a global setting.

Originally South Korea did not have the capability to compete in a global economy until the 1960s when it transitioned from a market focused on domestic products to an export-reliant economy. Prior to this change, the Korean economic system was heavily characterized by its agriculture and mining industries, while manufacturing only consisted of primary products that amounted to 3% of the country’s GNP. However, by expanding its manufacturing sector to simple products like textiles, and eventually sophisticated goods like automobiles and computers, total exports represented over 40 percent of Korean GNP. A result of this was that “the compound annual growth of per capita income was well in excess of 7 percent, making it one of the fastest growing economies in the world during this period” (Westphal 43).Screen Shot 2016-03-17 at 9.07.37 PM

South Korea has earned its rank as the eleventh largest global trading nation, exploding in trade value from $134.9 billion in 1990 to beyond $857.3 billion in 2008. Trading partners of the country originally included Japan, Europe, and the United States, but eventually a large percentage of total Korean exports ended up in China. By 2008, Korea had trade agreements with over 220 countries. The sophistication of the manufactured exports of Korea has increased over time, resulting in a current primary export market of chemicals, automobiles, computers, and other forms of high-level technology (Bark 24-36).

With the rise of corporate manufacturing in South Korea, many family-controlled conglomerates have risen with the aid of government policies that allowed them to benefit from tax advantages, exceptional loans, anti-labor policies, and various government contributions. A prime example of this consists of the dominant presence of Samsung in Korean economic activity and daily life. Aside from the penetration of Samsung in Korean education, electronics, amusement parks, life insurance, medicine, and housing, the company accounts for twenty percent of Korean exports and roughly seventeen percent of the annual GNP (Estrin).

When examining the success of Samsung in Korea, it is also important to assess the level of corruption that may be occurring within the realms of labor and management. In 2013, it was found that the Samsung Electronics factories had been contributing to various diseases of former employees. The corporation provided compensation to the workers who protested about this very issue, but Samsung refused to acknowledge any blame (Estrin).

Samsung demonstrates the power that multinational corporations have on an export-based economy like South Korea. “The former chairman of Samsung, Lee Kun-hee, was convicted of tax evasion and breach of trust in 2009, but he received a presidential pardon and returned to the chairmanship” (Estrin). The essentiality of Samsung to Korean economics can actually be deemed as frightening. It can be difficult for one to say that it is moral that the needs of the corporation outweigh the governmental law considering how fundamental Samsung is to Korean wealth.

Another problem that has emerged through the rapid development of South Korea is the massively increasing problem of income inequality. According to the IMF, forty-five percent of total income was being shared by the top ten percent of Korean earners. This percentage was the highest among its Asian-Pacific counterparts, with Singapore coming close at forty-two percent and Japan at forty-one percent (The Korea Economic Daily). This shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise considering most of the labor in South Korea is being focused in manufacturing while the top earners reside in the conglomerates that have been aided by government policies for decades.

This leaves the question then whether South Korea can be presented a successful model for export-driven developing economies. The empirical data demonstrates immense prosperity over the last three decades, especially when looking at the country’s change in GNP and global trade relations. However, when looking from a humanitarian lens, can we look past the increasing income gap, poor labor conditions, and the crippling power of large multinational corporations? It is important to assess all sides of the situation and weigh the pros and cons to international trade and its impact on developing economies. The blogs that follow will hopefully allow readers to examine the many outcomes, both expected and unexpected, of utilizing international trade as a method of participating in modern development.

Sources Cited:
Bark, Taeho. Ed. Byongwon Bahk and Gi-Wook Shin. Shorenstein APARC Working Papers. Stanford University, Feb. 2012. Web.

Estrin, James. “Samsung and the South Korean Success Story.” Web log post. NY Times Lens Blogs. NY Times, 13 Nov. 2015. Web.

“Korea’s Income Inequality Largest among Asian Nations…IMF Report.” The Korea Economic Daily. 16 Mar. 2016. Web.

Westphal, Larry E. “Industrial Policy in an Export-Propelled Economy: Lessons from South Korea’s Experience.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 4.3 (1990): 41-59. JSTOR. Web.

 

Look Back to Move Ahead?

That civilization came into existence because of agriculture is not an assumption but a fact. Agriculture was the cornerstone that marked Homo sapiens’ turn from nomadic gatherers and hunters to dwellers in a settlement. And these settlements are what constitute a civilization. In this way I find it intriguing to realize that agriculture was not just the basis of sustenance, but also the seed through which civilization was born.

And what intrigues me even more is how farming techniques all over the world were different, unique and thus reflected the collective and adaptive intuition of people molded according to the topography, climate and features of the space they inhabit for their need. From the idea of companion planting of crops, especially the Three Sisters (squash, maize and beans), practiced by the Native Americans to the instinctive choice, which can be traced back, to the techniques mentioned in ancient Roman literature, of planting legumes to naturally fixate nitrogen in the soil, to the economic use of manure for many purposes in villages of South Asia, it is evident that traditional farming techniques were creative, constructive and conscious.

But the environmentally sound practices of traditional farming were either swept away by or had to conform (and still do) to the demands of colonialism, postcolonial development projects and globalization. Monoculture farming usurped farming various crops. Chemical fertilizers increased yield in shorter period of time as opposed to traditional options like organic manure. And hybridized seeds replaced natural seeds.

Many will argue that with the booming population, industrialization of agriculture is the only answer but more than often being oblivious to its environmental repercussions. And my doubt over that notion may sound naively idealistic but I will be writing on how traditional or indigenous agricultural practices may be the better alternatives to commercial agriculture.

References:

Landon, Amanda J. “The “How” of the Three Sisters: The Origins of Agriculture in Mesoamerica and the Human Niche”. Nebraska Anthropologist (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska-Lincoln). 1 Jan.2008. Web. 18 Mar.2016.

Kolbert, Elizabeth. “Head Count”. The New Yorker. 21 Oct. 2013. Web. 18 Mar. 2016

Graber, Cynthia. “Framing Like the Incas”. Smithsonian. 6 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Mar. 2016

Globalization in Africa Introduction Post

african-exploitation

I am interested in globalization in Africa because I was born and raised in an African Country, the Democratic Republic of Congo. Growing up, I did not notice most things that I would notice now after years of school and experience. Last summer, I recently went to visit the Congo after being away for 8 years and I noticed many changes, some positive, some negative. Although I have seen how globalization has impacted my home country, I would like to widen and better understand the impact of globalization on the whole continent. I would like to research how globalization has affected different countries and the factors that led to it; economic, political leadership, etc.

In one of the scholarly article I have chosen to utilize for my blog post, the author states that “Globalization has turned the world into the big village” (Ibrahim, 2009:86). I thought that this is an accurate definition of globalization that depicts the realities of globalization. Usually, when globalization is defined, it is often described as the integration of the world politically, economically and socially. The definition by the author of the article I chose provides a visualizing image of globalization. In a village, there is often social hierarchy. There are the village king or chief, his entourage then the regular habitants of the village. Similarly, in globalization, there is social hierarchy, there are countries that benefit and those that do not benefit from globalization. This inequality is what I attempt to explore in my blog posts. 

The continent of Africa has undergone many different changes that could contribute to its decision to globalize in the last century. Many African Nations were enslaved and were able to gain independence in the late 1950s to early 1960s. In addition to that, these newly industrialized countries suffer from weak leadership. The leaders of many African nations are corrupt and want to benefit from the natural resources these nations possess. The decision of African nations to globalize has impacted Africa culturally and economically and politically. The rise of democracies in Africa could be credited to the Globalization Project (Shaka, 2013). With globalization, there is also the emergence of the struggle for survival. This disrupts the social, traditional and cultural dynamics of communities. Which is interesting because globalization is meant to increase economic growth, of course this is not applicable to everyone.  As I explore this theme, I would like to learn more about the inequality that is created by globalization. It is unfair that some members benefit while others don’t because of development.

Using the Google Scholar, I found an article from the (International Journal of Humanities and Social Science) titled The Impact of Globalization on Africa. I then proceeded to the United Nations University website, where I found a Policy Brief titled Linking Globalization to Poverty.I also researched a local newspaper from the region of my choice. I found a South-African newspaper called the Financial Mail. In this newspaper, I found an article on globalization titled Boardroom Tails: We really must grow up. Lastly, I found a Western newspaper article from the Guardian titled I was wrong. Free market trade policies hurt the poor. In addition to that, I also found an interview video about the impact of globalization on Africa by Kingsley Moghalu Africa has become a playground for globalization.

Drawing from these different research sources, I hope to gain a better understanding of the impact of globalization on the region of Africa. These sources will also guide my readers understand the individual, state, and international level of analysis of the issue.

Discussion Question:

What is your opinion on globalization?

Watch Who wins from globalization? it might help form an opinion on this vast topic.

Works Cited

Anderson, Mark, and Claudine Spera. “Kingsley Moghalu: ‘Africa Has Become a Playground for Globalisation’ – Video.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 4 Aug. 2014. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Byers, Stephen. “Stephen Byers: I Was Wrong. Free Market Trade Policies Hurt the Poor.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 19 May 2003. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Crotty, Ann. “Boardroom Tails: We Really Must Grow up.” Financial Mail. Financial Mail, 10 Mar. 2016. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Ibrahim, Alhaji A. “Neoliberalism, and Globalization in Africa.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (2008): n. pag. Center for Promoting Ideas. Center for Promoting Ideas, 15 Aug. 2013. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.
Muyale-Manenji, Fridah. “The Effects of Globalization on Culture in Africa in the Eyes of an African Woman – World Council of Churches.” The Effects of Globalization on Culture in Africa in the Eyes of an African Woman – World Council of Churches. World Council of Churches, 01 Jan. 1998. Web. 16 Mar. 2016.
Nissanke, Machiko, and Erik Thorbecke. Linking Globalization to Poverty.
Helsinki: United Nations U (UNU). World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER), 2007. United Nations University. UNU-Wider, 2007. Web. 13 Mar. 2016.