SinceVietnam has been conducting a process of economic innovation. It has been steadily opening its economy to be able to integrate into the global marketplace more and more. During this time, Vietnam has greatly changed. This essay will discuss the effects of globalization on Vietnam with 2 forces:
Let me nonetheless outline briefly what I understand by the term.
I shall then go on to consider what has caused it. The bulk of my paper is devoted to discussing what we know, and what we do not know, about its consequences.
I will conclude by considering what policy reactions seem to be called for. The Concept It is the world economy which we think of as being globalized.
We mean that the whole of the world is increasingly behaving as though it were a part of a single market, with interdependent production, consuming similar goods, and responding to the same impulses. It is reflected in the explosion of foreign direct investment FDI: While they cannot be measured with the same ease, some other features of globalization are perhaps even more interesting.
An increasing share of consumption consists of goods that are available from the same companies almost anywhere in the world. The technology that is used to produce these goods is increasingly standardized and invariant to the location of production.
Above all, ideas have increasingly become the common property of the whole of humanity. This was brought home to me vividly by a conference that I attended four years ago, where we discussed the evolution of economic thought around the world during the half-century since World War Two Coats We debated whether the increasing degree of convergence in economic thinking and technique, and the disappearance of national schools of economic thought, could more aptly be described as the internationalization, the homogenization, or the Americanization of economics.
My own bottom line was that economics had indeed been largely internationalized, that it had been substantially homogenized, but only to a limited extent Americanized, for non-American economists continue Discuss the effects of globalization on make central contributions to economic thought, as the Nobel Committee recognized by its award to Amartya Sen a few weeks before this conference took place.
Incidentally, the nicest summary of the change in economic thinking over the period was offered by the Indian participant in that conference, who remarked that his graduate students used to return from Cambridge, England focusing on the inadequacies of the Invisible Hand, while now they return from Cambridge Mass.
In the same vein, one of the more telling criticisms of my phrase "the Washington Consensus" was that the substantial though certainly incomplete consensus on economic policy extends far beyond Washington.
However, there are areas where globalization is incomplete, even in the economic sphere. In particular, migration is very far from being free.
Highly skilled professionals have a relatively high degree of mobility, but those without skills often face obstacles in migrating to higher-wage countries. Despite the difficulties, substantial proportions of the labour forces of some countries are in fact working abroad: Moreover, globalization is much less of a reality in other fields than it is in the economic one.
Culture still displays strong national, and even regional and local, variations. While English is clearly in the process of emerging to be a common world language, at least as a second language, minority languages are making something of a comeback, at least in developed countries.
Sport is still very different around the world: Although the nation state is far less dominant than it used to be, with significant powers being devolved both downwards to regional and local authorities and upwards to international and in Europe to supranational institutions and although "interfering in the internal affairs of another state" is less frowned on than formerlypolitics is still organized primarily on the basis of nation-states.
Causes What explains this globalization? It is certainly not attributable to conquest, the source of most previous historical episodes where a single economic system has held sway over a vast geographical terrain. The source lies instead in the development of technology.
The costs of transport, of travel, and above all the costs of communicating information have fallen dramatically in the postwar period, almost entirely because of the progress of technology.
The first computers were lumbering away with piles of punched cards in the early postwar years, and telegrams provided the only rapid means of written communication. There was no fax or internet or e-mail or world-wide web, no PCs or satellites or cell-phones.
Today we witness phenomena that no futurist dreamed of half a century ago, such as Indians with medical degrees residing in Bangalore who earn a living by acting as secretaries to American doctors by transcribing their tapes overnight.
It is clearly the availability of cheap, rapid and reliable communications that permits such phenomena, just as this is the key to the integration of the international capital market.
I presume the same factor is important in nurturing the growth of multinational corporations, since it is this which enables them to exploit their intellectual property efficiently in a variety of locations without losing the ability to maintain control from head office.
But in this context I would surmise that other factors are also at work, such as the spread of consumer knowledge about what is available that comes from travel and from advertising, itself encouraged by the communications revolution and its children like CNN.
The reduction in transport costs is also a key factor underlying the growth in trade. Of course, it needed a reasonably peaceful world to induce economic agents to exploit the opportunities for globalization presented by technological progress.
But the technological basis for the phenomenon of globalization implies that, barring an end to the "Pax Americana" or else extremely vigorous conscious actions to reverse the process, globalization is here to stay. Consequences Globalization certainly permits an increase in the level of global output.
Whether as a result of the old Heckscher-Ohlin theory of the basis of comparative advantage as lying in different factor abundance in different countries, or as a result of the new trade theories that explain trade by increasing returns to scale, trade will increase world output.
It may also bring products that would otherwise be unavailable to the countries where the investment occurs, which presumably increases the quality, and therefore the value, of world output.This paper will discuss the benefits and drawbacks from the point of view that globalization made in the developing countries in the three important fields such as economic and trade processes.
While discussing the effects of globalization, how can we forget about the impact of foreign trade on an economy. Comparative advantage has always been a factor, even in during old times.
While trade originated in the times of early kingdoms, it has been institutionalized due to globalization. Globalization has impacted nearly every aspect of modern life and continues to be a growing force in the global economy.
While there are a few drawbacks to globalization, most economists agree that it's a force that's both unstoppable and net beneficial to the world economy. Globalization leads to the interdependence between nations, which could cause regional or global instabilities if local economic fluctuations end up impacting a large number of countries relying on them.
The Effects of Inflation on Global Investments. What Populism Means for Your Portfolio. Globalization, for good or ill, is here to stay.
Globalization is an attempt to abolish barriers, especially in trade. In fact, it has been around longer than you might think. Globalization is an elimination of barriers to trade, communication, and cultural exchange.
The theory behind globalization. Globalization has become a familiar enough word, the meaning of which has been discussed by others before me during this conference. Let me nonetheless outline briefly what I understand by the term.
I shall then go on to consider what has caused it.