Globalization


 * Definition**

Globalization has various competing definitions (Scholte, 2005, p. 15-7) and no consensus on its meaning among globalization scholars (Ritzer, 2007, p. 1). In the late 19th century, the word ‘global’ had a dual meaning of ‘world-wide’ and ‘totality’, and first appeared as ‘globalization’ in the mid-20th century (Grossberg, 2005, p. 146). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, globalization refers to the making of any action, process, or fact global. It was first used in 1930 to describe a comprehensive educational state of mind. However, the term was not explicitly recognized until the 1970s in sociology, and did not enter popular discourse until the early 1990s, shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall (Robinson & White, 2007, p. 55). Nevertheless, the debate over globalization’s historical roots, which stems from whether globalization precedes (Robertson, 1992, p. 58-60) or proceeds (Albrow, 1996, p. 92-90; Giddens, 1990, p. 70-8) modernity, is still uncertain (Held et al., 1999, p. 12-3). Despite the disputes over origin, globalization has generated into a plethora of different theories, implications, and dimensions. Additionally, while globalization scholarship is most notably associated with theoretical and critical work, empirical studies are on the rise.


 * Globalization and "Wold Systems"**

Theories of globalization have made a variety of claims (see Stohl, 2005, p. 232-40; Robinson, 2007, for succinct reviews) and even stimulated heated debate (i.e., Rosenberg, 2000, p. 1-9). One of the earliest theories of globalization (though not self-identified as one) originally developed in 1974 from Immanuel Wallerstein. His World Systems Theory is a historical embodiment of a capitalist world system that describes an international division of labor in which affluent “core” nations exploit less wealthy “periphery” nations for cheap labor and resources (see Wallerstein, 2000, p. 88-91 for summary). A similar global capitalism model is Sklair’s (1999, p. 156-8) concept of transnational practices, (i.e., transnational corporations), which are responsible for perpetuating free-market practices, structures, and ideologies (see also Hardt and Negri, 2000). As such, it should be no surprise that globalization is often viewed as an ideology that emphasizes neoliberal economic structures (Steger, 2007, p. 370-1) and is often associated with imperialism (Herman & McChesney, 2001, p. 9).

The juxtaposition of two concepts neoliberalism and globalization within the postwar order seems to signal the end of colonial imperialism and herald a new age of political self-determination and state-led development. (Radice, 2005, p.92) But the new geopolitical power among nations does not put an end to international economic inequalities and underdevelopment. Critiques such as “dependency theory” explained the new form of imperialism—the Third World was exploited by economic imperialism instead of the direct political rule of colonialism. (Radice, 2005, p.93) Economic factors have long been linked with globalization, since the 16th century Europe, which is pointed by many scholars as the original source of globalization, the pursuit of economic opportunity is a major motivation for people to establish worldwide connections (Lechner & Boli, 2008, p.2).

Anti-globalization typically refers to opposition against corporate globalization (Juris, 2008, p. 6). However, besides transnational franchise, the role of state is crucial as the neoliberal turn became the global economic new order. The fad does not lead to the “hollowing out” of the state but is associated with more tolerance to state intervention (Birch & Mykhnenko, 2001, p.7). In order to create and preserve an institutional framework appropriate for neoliberal economic practice, such as facilitating the free market and free trade under global context, the state is expected to perform more than just night-watchman, and the intervention is embodied by the rapid development of transnational financial cooperation like G8. Besides, the supernational institutions like WTO and World Bank also signal how globalization is intertwined with economy.

Other theories have focused on globalization as an alternation of the human condition. Perhaps the most influential scholar is Anthony Giddens, who views globalization as the increasing influence of distant social relations into the local and compression of space and time (Giddens, 1990, 63-5; see Harvey, 1990, as well). Similarly, Castell’s (1996) approach to globalization is the emergence of the network society, a new form of social organization based on communication technologies (p. 60-1). In a less homogenous vein, Robertson’s (1992) concept of glocalization argues that globalizing phenomena are actually being localized and vice versa (p. 100 & p. 173-4).


 * Political Globalization**

Political theories of globalization typically focus on the sovereignty of nation-states (Delanty & Rumford, 2007, p. 416-9). On one hand, there is the view that nation-states are becoming irrelevant because of interdependent processes of globalization (Ohme, 1996, p. 12-20). On the other hand, there is the view that the decisions of nation-states are more consequential than ever (Blackman, 2007, p. 437-9) and thus, do not diminish the sovereignty of nation-states (Meyer et al., 1997, p. 157). Others point to the increasing importance of a global civil society, led by the growing relevance and numbers of international non-governmental organizations (Boli & Petrova, 2007, p. 116-8; Thomas, 2007, p. 95-7).


 * Cultural Globalization**

Theories of cultural globalization typically focus on global identities and societies (Sklair, 1999, p. 151-4). An oft-cited cultural phenomenon is the increase in global consciousness (Stohl, 2005, p. 253-4). Explanations for this increasing global identity include the effects of global mass media (Robertson, 1992, p. 184), passive effects of shared global risk (Beck, 2006, p. 33-40), space-time distanciation (Giddens, 1991, p. 17-20), and deterritorialization, that is, the increasing insignificance of geographical location for culture (Tomlinson, 2007, p. 359-65). More comprehensive accounts like Held et al. (1999, p. 27-9) argue that globalization is a multifaceted phenomenon that “refers to patterns of growing global interconnectedness within all key domains of social activity” (p. 27). Similarly, Sjolander (1996, p. 604) argues that the rhetoric of globalization needs to be more holistic, taking into account multiple political, economic, social, and ideological dimensions.

Finally, several scholars ponder communication and globalization. The most common role of communication is as a facilitator of different globalization processes. For example, Monge (1998, p. 147) identifies communication as an enabler of time-space compression (i.e., Giddens, 2003, p. 10-2), global consciousness (i.e., Roberston, 1992, p. 172), and disembeddedness (i.e., Giddens, 1990, p. 21; Tomlinson, 2007, p. 359-63). Moreover, Waters (1995, p. 9) argues that communication is the chief cultural globalizing process (cited in Monge, 1998, p. 148).


 * Empirical Studies**

Empirical research associated with globalization and communication has not nearly been as forthcoming as theory. Nevertheless, as Monge (1998, p. 142) notes, scholars have frequently researched communication areas related to globalization. Some examples include development communication (Jacobson & Storey, 2004) and global media organizations (Aresenault & Castells, 2008). Several reasons for the lack of empirical globalization research are disputes over levels of analysis and complexities on how specific globalization dimensions interact (Guillen, 2001, p. 28).

However, recent communication research has used specific theories of globalization to formulate research questions, hypotheses, and methods. For example, Shumate and Dewitt (2008) use World Systems Theory to analyze the differences in hyperlink behavior between global north and global south nongovernmental organizations (p. 414, Table 2). Likewise, Tsan-Kuo et al. (2009) analyze the differences in incoming hyperlinks among news websites from core, periphery, and semi-periphery countries (p. 150, Table 2). Using the same framework, Kim and Barnett (2000, p. 113, Table 6) show that the telecommunication system reflects a core-periphery structure, while Seungyoon’s et al. (2007) results (p. 429) suggest that world systems theory may outdated to understand communication traffic between nation-states. Other quantitative studies have investigated theories of growing cosmopolitanism (Jung, 2006; Norris, 2000; Schueth & O’Loughlin, 2006). Moreover, Norris and Inglehart’s (2009) seminal work finds evidence for the positive relationship between use of global communication technologies and cosmopolitan values (p. 190-1, Table 6.2; p. 232-3, Table 8.4; p. 254, Table 9.4).


 * Qualitative communication** work has also investigated claims of globalization. For instance, Higgins (2009) looks into how the language of the Tanzanian hip hop culture is reflective of Robertson’s idea of glocalization (p. 101-9). And Juris’s (2008) enthnographic work, which takes off from Castell’s (1996) network society, analyzes communication within a diverse network of anti-globalization organizations.

Minor revision by Wei-Fen Chen (July 2012).

include component="comments" page="page:Globalization" limit="10"


 * References**

Albrow, M. (1996). The global age: State and society beyond modernity. Cambridge: Polity.

Arsenault, A., & Castells, M. (2008). The structure and dynamics of global multi-media business networks. International Journal of Communication, 2(707-748).

Beck, U. (2006). The cosmopolitan vision. Cambridge: Polity.

Blackman, T. (2007). Globalization and public policy. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 429-443). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Birch, K., & Mykhnenko, V. (Eds.). (2010). The Rise and Fall of Neo-Liberalism. New York, NY: Zed Books.

Boli, J., & Petrova, V. (2007). Globalization today. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 103-124). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.

Delanty, G., & Rumford, C. (2007). Political globalization. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 414-428). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity.

Giddens, A. (2003). Runaway world: How globalisation is reshaping our lives ([2nd ed.). London: Profile.

Grossberg, L. (2005). Globalization. In T. Bennett, L. Grossberg, M. Morris & R. Williams (Eds.), New keywords: A revised vocabulary of culture and society (pp. 146-150). Malden, MA ; Oxford: Blackwell Pub.

Guillén, M. F. (2001). Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive or Feeble? A Critique of Five Key Debates in the Social Science Literature. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 235-260. doi: doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.235

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, Mass. ; London: Harvard University Press.

Harvey, D. (1990). The condition of post-modernity. London: Blackwell.

Held, D. (1999). Global transformations: Politics, economics and culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Herman, E. S., & McChesney, R. W. (2001). The global media: The new missionaries of corporate capitalism. London: Continuum.

Higgins, C. (2009). From da bomb to bomba. In H. S. Alim, A. Ibrahim & A. Pennycook (Eds.), Global linguistic flows: Hip hop cultures, youth identities, and the politics of language (pp. 95-112). New York, NY : Routledge.

Jacobson, T., & Storey, J. (2004). Development communication and participation: Applying Habermas to a case study of population programs in Nepal. Communication theory, 14, 99-121.

Jung, J. (2008). Growing supranational identities in a globalising world? A multilevel analysis of the World Values Surveys. European Journal of Political Research, 47(5), 578-609.

Juris, J. (2008). Networking futures: The movement against corporate globalization. Durham: Duke University Press.

Kim, K., & Barnett, G. (2000). The structure of the international telecommunications regime in transition: A network analysis of international organizations. International Relations, 26(1), 91-126.

Lechner, F., & Boli, J. (Eds.). (2008) The Globalization Reader. (3 rd  ed.). Malden, Mass: Blackwell.

Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World Society and the Nation-State. American Journal of Sociology,103(1), 144-181.

Monge, P. (1998). Communication structures and processes in globalization. Journal of Communication, 48, 142-153.

Norris, P. (2000). Global governance and cosmopolitan citizens. In J. S. Nye & J. D. Donahue (Eds.), Governance in a globalizing world (pp. 155-177). Cambridge, Mass.Washington, D.C.: Visions of Governance for the 21st Century ; Brookings Institution Press.

Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2009). Cosmopolitan communications: Cultural diversity in a globalized world. New York ; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ohmae, K. i. (1996). The end of the nation state: The rise of regional economies (1st pbk. ed.). New York: Free Press Paperbacks.

Radice, H. (2005) Neoliberal Globalization: Imperialism without Empires? In Saad-Filho, A., & Johnston, D. (Eds.), Neoliberalism-A Critical Reader, 91-98. London: Pluto Press.

Ritzer, G. (2007). The Blackwell companion to globalization. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. London: Sage.

Robertson, R., & White, K. (2007). What is globalization? In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 54-67). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Robinson, W. (2007). Theories of globalization. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 125-144). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Rosenberg, J. (2000). The follies of globalization theory. London, UK: Verso.

Scholte, J. A. (2005). Globalization: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Schueth, S., & O'Loughlin, J. (2008). Belonging to the world: Cosmopolitanism in geographic contexts. Geoforum, 39(2), 926-941. doi:DOI: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.10.002

Seungyoon, L., Monge, P., Bar, F., & Matei, S. A. (2007). The Emergence of Clusters in the Global Telecommunications Network. Journal of Communication, 57(3), 20p. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00350.x

Shumate, M., & Dewitt, L. (2008). The North/South divide in NGO hyperlink networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 405-433.

Sjolander, C. (1996). Rhetoric of Globalization: What's in a Wor(l)d. International Journal, 51, 603-616.

Sklair, L. (1999). Competing conceptions of globalization. Journal of World-Systems Research, 2, 143-163.

Steger, M. (2007). Globalizatoin and ideology. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 367-382). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Stohl, C. (2005). Globalization theory. In S. May & D. K. Mumby (Eds.), Engaging organizational communication theory & research: Multiple perspectives (pp. 223-261). Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London: Sage Publications.

Thomas, G. M. (2007). Globalization: The major players. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 84-102).Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.

Tomlinson, J. (2007). Cultural globalization. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to globalization (pp. 352-366). Malden, Mass.:Blackwell.

Tsan-Kuo, C., Himelboim, I., & Dong, D. (2009). Open global networks, close international flows: World System and Political Economy of Hyperlinks in Cyberspace. International Communication Gazette, 71(3), 137-159. doi: 10.1177/1748048508100910

Wallerstein, I. (2000). The rise and future demise of the world capitalist system: Concepts for comparative analysis. In I. Wallerstein (Ed.), The essential Wallerstein (pp. 71-103). New York: The New Press.

Waters, M. (1995). Globalization. London: Routledge.

Williams, R. (1985). Keywords : a vocabulary of culture and society (Rev. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.