The phenomenon of economic globalization, which took off in the last four decades, has come to define this period in world history. The trading relations between the developed and developing countries reached unprecedented heights during this period. While this boosted the Gross Domestic Products of the involved countries, the distribution of wealth within nations has been highly disproportional. Evidence shows that globalization has not reduced the percentage of human beings living below the poverty line. Such poverty has forced most rural communities to seek job opportunities in nearby cities, which has made the cities over populated, polluted and losing their cultural heritage. The critical assessment of whether or not cities are increasingly becoming more like one another should be made in this context. This essay purports to do the same by perusing relevant scholarly sources to support the claims.
There is copious evidence to support the contrarian view that neo-liberal globalization has made major industrial cities across the world look and feel the same. What is at work is the concept referred to as McDonaldization of the world. That is, the traditional cultural markers that distinguish one city from another gets subsumed under the hoardings, displays and product outlets of multinational brands. For example, the McDonald’s restaurant chain, which was started in the United States, is now ubiquitous in all major cities of the world. The same could be said about other major consumer brands such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nike, Reebok, KFC, etc (Rogers, 2003, p.1184). The unique architectural style that is associated with different regions of the world is covered or replaced by displays of above mentioned brands, making the city lose its uniqueness and visual identity. This trend could be observed in capital cities of countries such as India, China, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore, Bolivia, Venezuela, Chile and others (Rogers, 2003, p.1184). These developing countries also seem to have benefited from globalization in certain other ways. For example,
“During the early 1970s, more than half its population was defined as poor; average life expectancy was 48 years, and only 40 per cent of the adult population was literate. Today, the percentage of the poor has decreased to about one fourth of the population, life expectancy has increased to 65 years, and about 70 per cent of adults are literate. This unprecedented decline in poverty in Asia and the Pacific has been described as one of the largest decreases in mass poverty in human history. Of all the world’s regions, according to report, Asia also ranks lowest in almost all types of crime.” (Foreign Policy, 2008, 70)
If certain aspects of the neo-liberal globalization project have had benign consequences, there has also been a fair share of criticisms. The economic globalization process also coincided with the boom in cable and satellite broadcast television and the Internet, which has indeed made the world a smaller place. A consequence of these developments is the exposure and adoption of Western cultural practices that manifests in the form of fashion, clothing, lifestyle patterns, changing nature of interpersonal relationships, conspicuous consumption, etc. Some critics point out that what is at play is a type of cultural imperialism, which constantly competes and replaces native, indigenous cultural practices in the developing world. Again, there is plenty of scholarly evidence to support the validity of this claim, beyond what is common knowledge. (Knox & Pinch, 2000)
There are two different ways in which the increasing resemblance between cities is interpreted. While some see it in terms of weakening of local culture and tradition, others see it as a progressive development. The United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-HABITAT), which undertakes extensive studies on subjects such as globalization, population displacement, economic immigration, etc, released in 2004 a report titled The State of the World’s Cities. This report takes cognizance of both the positive and negative consequences of globalization on world’s prominent cities. While acknowledging the intrusion of Western culture into those of developing nations, it asserts that
“multiculturalism as an urban phenomenon should be celebrated, not feared, as it enhances the fabric of societies and brings color and vibrancy to every city it touches…there are approximately 175 million documented international migrants worldwide. The flow of humanity into the cities is fuelling a new multiculturalism that has the potential to broaden their cultural and ethnic dimensions. However, some cities have been unable to cope with multiculturalism, which has generated increasing xenophobia and ethnic tensions”. (Osanjo & Warah, 2004, p.56)
At first, the increasing resemblance between cities across the world might give an impression that the developing world is catching up with the developed world in terms of economic prosperity. This is certainly true to the extent that we learn from GDP and other economic indicators. But intellectuals have pointed out that the multinational corporations that operate in developing nations have acted irresponsibly toward the local and broader communities in which they operate. While they can accurately evaluate the values of tangible assets, more often than not the measure of intangible consequences of the company’s operations are not accounted. So, now the citizenry of the area surrounding the company’s processing or manufacturing facility gets affected. The affectation could be of varying degrees and can manifest slowly over a long period of time (Foreign Policy, 2008, 70). These are all costs alright, but not for the concerned transnational corporations. These ‘externalities’ are not accounted for by them. For example, emerging economies such as India and China, alongside middle or low-income economies with growth potential have attracted several foreign institutional investors. These economies “typically have less sophisticated market supporting institutions and fewer location advantages based on created assets, such as infrastructure and human capital” (Foreign Policy, 2008, 71). This situation leads to over population, high levels of poverty, rise of urban shanty towns and also creates friction between social groups. This sad situation is belied by urban symbols such as the skyscrapers and high-tech industry.
Taking note of the unsavory consequences of economic globalization, the UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan had pointed out that “policy makers need to plan for ‘cities of difference’, which are open to all and exclude none, and are able to capitalize on the benefits of a multicultural existence. This requires the engagement of all non-governmental and community stakeholders on the basis of legislation that guarantees the rights of citizens to the city and judicial systems that enforce those rights” (Annan, as quoted in Osanjo & Warah, 2004, p.56 This observation comes in the light of a UN report that showed how poverty levels are on an ascendency in many cities and how this is partially due to the uneven costs and benefits of economic globalization. Furthermore, Annan pointed out that “urban poverty has been increasingly concentrated in particular neighborhoods that have generally become the habitats of the urban poor and minority groups: racial minorities in some societies, international immigrant groups in others.” (Annan, as quoted in Osanjo & Warah, 2004, p.56)
This assessment is further validated by the findings reported in United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Beyond economic indicators of prosperity, the HDI takes into account a broader set of parameters that measure human well being and social harmony in a country. These parameters include child mortality rates, women’s freedom within society, quality of air, access to drinking water, adequate health care facilities etc. Since economic globalization has accelerated in the last four decades, it is instructive to study HDI measures over this time period. What emerges from these studies is that the human development scores for the local population in most cities has declined or stagnated in the period. This suggests that while cities have grown to resemble one another, they also mirror the poverty and inequality evident in them. (Sands, 2001, p.1)
As the process of globalization took off, the planners and mayors of many cities were left wanting of ideas and resources to cater to the ever increasing city dwelling population. The inadequacy and lack of foresight among both government agencies and business corporations to address this situation has created urban overpopulation in both the developed and developing world. According to World’s Cities, the developed countries attract majority of the international migrants (more than 77 million), followed by countries whose economies are in transition – such as in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Republics – account for 33 million. The Asia-Pacific region saw an urban immigration of 23 millions whereas the Middle East and North Africa combined saw 21 millions (Passas, 2000, p.17). It is important to note that
“In many cities, lack of affordable housing and discriminatory practices force newcomers to live spatially segregated lives in ghettos, where they suffer labor exploitation, social exclusion and violence. This is unfortunate, says the report, because immigrants make important economic contributions not only to the urban economies of the host countries but also to the countries they leave behind. Remittances back home are second only to oil in terms of international monetary flows, providing an important and reliable source of foreign exchange finance. In 2003, for example, Indian Diaspora sent back $15 billion, exceeding the revenues generated by the country’s software industry”. (Osanjo & Warah, 2004, p.57)
A few other studies point out that globalization has increased the levels of corruption in the developing world. For example, the prominent cities in Southeast Asian nations of Indonesia, Thailand; Asian nations of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, and several East European countries such as Belarus, Georgia, Croatia and to a lesser extent in China, the levels of corruption have increased since the opening up of their economies. In other words, “as foreign firms entered and new firms were born within developing and transition economies, scholars and social commentators grew more aware of the magnitude of corruption and the need to understand and address it. Research on corruption over the past decade poses some fundamental questions and highlights the importance of checking this trend. In the context of globalization, corruption is the misuse of public power for private gain.” (Aguirre & Reese, 2004, p.2)
Hence, while cities in the developing world increasingly resemble those in the developed world, they have given rise to numerous social, economic and cultural problems. In cities across the world, irrespective of the economic prosperity of a select minority, the “inequalities between the richest and poorest people in the world as well as inequality within and between nations is growing – this is true in the rich countries of the United States and the European Union, most (but not all) of the transition economies of the old Soviet bloc, China and India – or persisting at very high levels, as in Latin America and Africa” (Weissman, 2003, p.9). The process of corporate globalization is largely to be blamed for this crisis. So unless powerful institutions such as the WTO, World Bank, the IMF act to regulate the global markets and thereby create a just and equitable global economic system, the unstable equilibrium seen in many cities today will give way to violence, rioting and chaos.
References:
The 2008 Global Cities Index: Cities Bear the Brunt of the World’s Financial Meltdowns, Crime Waves, and Climate Crises in Ways National Governments Never Will. So, When Foreign Policy, A.T. Kearny, and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Teamed Up to Measure Globalization around the World, We Focused on the 60 Cities That Shape Our Lives the Most. (2008, November/December). Foreign Policy, 68+.
Aguirre, A., & Reese, E. (2004). Introduction: The Challenges of Globalization for Workers Transnational and Transborder Issues. Social Justice, 31(3), 1+.
Garb, Y. (2008, March/April). Special Place or Special Zone? the Future of Aqaba: This 10,000-Year-Old Settlement Has Endured Countless Changes. Now It Faces Economic Globalization. World Watch, 21, 16+.
Knox, P. L and Pinch S. (2000) Urban Social Geography: an introduction, 5th and 6th edition, Harlow, Prentice Hall.
Lo, F. & Marcotullio, P. J. (Eds.). (2001). Globalization and the Sustainability of Cities in the Asia Pacific Region /. New York: United Nations University Press.
Orozco, M. (2002). Globalization and Migration: the Impact of Family Remittances in Latin America. Latin American Politics and Society, 44(2), 41+.
Osanjo, T., & Warah, R. (2004, December). The State of the World’s Cities, 2004/2005: Globalization and Urban Culture. UN Chronicle, 41, 55+.
Passas, N. (2000). Global Anomie, Dysnomie, and Economic Crime: Hidden Consequences of Neoliberalism and Globalization in Russia and around the World. Social Justice, 27(2), 16.
Rogers, W. H. (2003). Innovation and the Growth of Cities. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(4), 1180+.
Sands, D. R. (2001, June 25). Cities Hosting Summits Face More Challenges as Protests Turn Violent. The Washington Times, p. 1.
Smith, N. J. (1998). Rainforest Cities: Urbanization, Development, and Globalization of the Brazilian Amazon. The Geographical Review, 88(2), 310+.
Weissman, R. (2003, July/August). Grotesque Inequality: Corporate Globalization and the Global Gap between Rich and Poor. Multinational Monitor, 24, 9+.
Wise, T. A., Salazar, H., & Carlsen, L. (Eds.). (2003). Confronting Globalization: Economic Integration and Popular Resistance in Mexico. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press.