Interesting globalization comic

Here is a comic about globalization that I thought were pretty amusing.























(Source: http://www.poghosyan.org/photos/gcoutsourcing.jpg)

From the comic above, the idea of outsourcing work to other countries isn't something new. The idea of globalization is underway to minimize production costs while at the same time trying to maximize profit. The girl from the joke attempts to outsource her homework to India. A country that has been receiving in-flow of production jobs from the US.

"So, what is outsourcing? Outsourcing is contracting with another company or person to do a particular function. Almost every organization outsources in some way. Typically, the function being outsourced is considered non-core to the business. An insurance company, for example, might outsource its janitorial and landscaping operations to firms that specialize in those types of work since they are not related to insurance or strategic to the business. The outside firms that are providing the outsourcing services are third-party providers, or as they are more commonly called, service providers.Although outsourcing has been around as long as work specialization has existed, in recent history, companies began employing the outsourcing model to carry out narrow functions, such as payroll, billing and data entry. Those processes could be done more efficiently, and therefore more cost-effectively, by other companies with specialized tools and facilities and specially trained personnel." - Sourcingmag.com

Interesting reading on globalization

If anyone is interested in reading about Globalization, there is piece by Guillén titled, “Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive or Feeble? A Critique of Five Key Debates in the Social Science Literature”.

Here is an except from it:

"The sociological, economic, political, and anthropological literatures are devoting increase attention to globalization. This chapter discusses the various connotations of the term and puts it in historical perspective. Existing theoretical and empirical research on globalization is organized around five key issues or questions: Is it really happening? Does it produce convergence? Does it undermine the authority of nation-states? Is globality different from modernity? Is a global culture in the making? A plea is made for a comparative sociology of globalization that is sensitive to local variations and to how agency, interest, and resistance mediate in the relationship between globalization causes and outcomes."

I read this for another class but thought it presented an interesting view on globalization.

Brazil Landfills

http://www.wastelandmovie.com/

This is a link to a documentary film that discusses how Brazil is home to the world's largest garbage dump, Jardim Gramacho. It is located on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro. The movie shows photographs of an eclectic band of “catadores”—self-designated pickers of recyclable materials. These pickers have been hired to walk through the garbage dump and pick through everyones waste to find recyclable materials. This job was created because so much waste was in the dump that they were running out of space.

How have we as a society gotten to this point? How have we created material and then not have proper ways to dispose of them? We simply try to find places to put our waste, such as a landfill, the ocean, and even space. As consumers we avoid the responsibilities associated with the materials we use everyday. Many times not even giving a second thought to it. People toss there trash into the streets or pour liquids down a storm drain. Recycling is a great way to reuse materials and is slowly being implemented around the world. Communities in many cities don't recycle and as consumers we have a desire to use more than necessary creating waste. Instead of only consuming what is necessary and in the most manageable way, we throw out materials in order to get new, higher tech materials.

The effects of our actions are starting to show and therefor forcing us to reach. As we continue to urbanize our societies and expand we will have to address as a society what to do with our waste. People need to be held responsible and consciously think about were their waste is going. By not taking personally responsibility you are hurting society as a whole.

-Siera Miller

The CEO Water Mandate

         In 2007, a collaborative partnership between the UN Global Compact, the Swedish government and group of businesses and their leaders established the CEO Water Mandate that addressed water scarcity and sanitation issues. The mission of the initiative "represents both a call to action and an actionable framework for companies around the world to advance toward water sustainability in their operations and supply chains" (PacificInstitute.org). Some provisions of the mandate include direct operations, supply chain and watershed management, public policy, tranparency, community involvement/engagement and collective action. This partnership between the UN, in accordance with the Millenium Development Goals, and this group of buisness leaders is a step in the right direction to addressing how to reduce pollution and manage water scarcity. These buisnesses are not large multi-national corporations but they present an exemplary position on environmental management and sustainability.
           In the text of the CEO Water Mandate, the buisness leaders recognize how their companies have direct impact in the polluting of water throughout the globe and hold accountability when addressing how to reduce these pollutants as well as try to prevent it from reoccurring. This mandate has been endorsed by 50 companies so far, all of which seek "responsible engagement with water policy" (pacificinstitute.org) that affect surrounding ecosytems and communities in a positive way.
          Hopefully this trend among business leaders and companies will expand to corporations and large businesses to ensure that environmental sustainability can be attainable!

This Website describes the mandate in more detail and provides other intitiatives for environmental sustainability:
http://www.pacinst.org/topics/globalization_and_environment/ceo_water_mandate/index.htm


----Sophie Gardner

Funny Poem

INTERNATIONAL
THINKING AT ITS BEST!

Question: What is the truest definition of Globalization?
Answer: Princess Diana's death.
Question: How come?
Answer: An English princess
with an Egyptian boyfriend
crashes in a French tunnel,
driving a German car
with a Dutch engine,
driven by a Belgian who was drunk
on Scottish whiskey,
followed closely by Italian Paparazzi,
on Japanese motorcycles;
treated by an American doctor,
using Brazilian medicines.
This is sent to you by an American,
using Bill Gates's technology,
and you're probably reading this on your computer,
that use Taiwanese chips,
and a Korean monitor,
assembled by Bangladeshi workers
in a Singapore plant,
transported by Indian lorry-drivers,
hijacked by Indonesians,
unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen,
and trucked to you by Mexican illegals.....
That, my friends, is Globalization

Author: Angie

--Lauren Kelly

Santa Claus--Globalization MASTER

Does this guy look familiar?? In spirit of the holiday season, I thought this was appropriate.  

This guy is amazing. He's probably one of the most recognizable person in the world, and yet his image is totally different throughout the world.  Companies use him to promote their products and he pretty much takes over the winter season.  As Americans and in lots of other places in the world we know him as he is seen in this picture.  An old man with a fluffly white beard and an impressive belly.  But in other areas he's completely different....

For example....

Austria has "Krampus" which is a satan looking santa sometimes carrying a pitchfork that scares the crap out of children and tries to have his way with the ladies on Dec. 5th...(weird).  In Italy they have La Befana who is a witch who rides her broomstick and delivers presents 

Santa could teach us a lesson or two about globalization...

--Lauren Kelly

CNN - Obama on globalization

In 2008, Obama addressed an audience in Michigan about the changing global market and the need for domestic change in the American work force. Michigan is marked by high rates of unemployment due to competition within the world market and the exploitative nature of multinational corporations. Many US based corporations involve the practice of outsourcing and as an affect, leave American workers jobless and unable to compete on a global scale.
Obama encourages American workers to be adaptive and innovative in a rapidly changing world so as to compete in the world market.
( I am aware that this is a campaign speech that is aimed to uplift the spirits of American workers but the message is still painfully true: we cannot be stagnant, we must move forward because the world is constantly in flux and we cannot rely on the "old ways" !)

--Sophie Gardner

Chocolate, Roses and Diamonds-- Symbols of love or symbols of exploitation?

     In light of the holiday season of giving it has come across my attention that everyday consumer items meant to symbolize love and affection are troubled by roots of exploitation and greed.  Items such as chocolate, roses and diamonds are purchased and presented to our loved ones as tokens of our affection and esteem. But what is the true cost? Is it really worth it?
       Globalization aims to establish a world market through the elimination of borders by means of communication, trade and transportation. While globalization does offer an integration of economic, social, and cultural entities, the effects can be devastating rather than uplifting to many less developed countries and their native peoples. Chocolate for instance is a consumer item found on the shelf of every grocery store and supermarket. This item is incredibly tasty (as most people will agree) and yet affordable to most consumers within the industrialized nations. Chocolate is marketed to everyone based on its appeal and availability, whether it be premium chocolates (e.g.,Godiva) or mass marketed chocolates (e.g., Hershey's Chocolates). However, this item is primarily produced in the Ivory Coast of Africa, which is characterized for its exploitative labor practices, including the utilization of child/youth slavery. Roses are also an item that many consumers dont even consider to be exploitive. We think that every local nursery grows their own roses but in fact, this product is usually extracted from African and South American countries which are all well known to be lax on their labor laws and often mistreat or provide unsatisfactory working conditions and unlivable working wages to their employees. In Kenya, workers are exposed to pesticides while picking roses and are also subject to poor working conditions and wages that fail to meet the cost of living. Lastly, as many people are well aware, the diamond industry is marked by blood, greed, and exploitation. Conflict diamonds finance wars and insurgencies, yet for Americans, these diamonds are viewed as luxuries and symbols of love.
   So my question is...how do we make it right? Do we boycott these items?  Do we ensure fair trade and sacrifice low prices? Do we look the other way and simply conform to the idea that ignorance is bliss or do we make people more aware that there is tragedy behind these profitable consumer items?

This topic may seem very overwhelming and as individuals we often feel hopeless that we can do anything to change this vicious cycle of greed and exploitation. However, we can make a difference by becoming smart and aware consumers (USE YOUR CONSCIOUS AND RESEARCH ITEMS INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING BLIND AND RABID CONSUMERISM) and maybe sacrificing a little by differentiating want and need.

--Sophie Gardner

ISMAM - A Blend of Mayan Social Organization and Modern Corporate Enterprises

      Upon browsing through the internet, I stumbled upon an article that discusses the associative corporation known as ISMAM (Indigenas de la Sierra Madre de Motozintla). This co-op integrates traditional Mayan social organization along with modern capitalist interests to provide fair trade practices for the production and manufacturing of organic coffee. "The development of ISMAM's organic strategy is analyzed as acheiving multiple goals, including improving soils and improving marketing conditions by permitting greater value-added to growers through direct access to high-value markets" (Ronald Nigh). As many people are aware, small agrarian farmers within the Latin American region often struggle to compete in the global market in regards to the production of coffee beans. Labor laws are lax and farmers/workers are unable to sustain a livable wage due to exploitation by multi-national corporations and the adverse effects of globalization. A trend of forced labor and/or unsatisfactory living and working conditions is often prevalent among large plantation coffee farms as well as small farms. ISMAM  incorporates 938 Mayan famers (peoplescoffee.co) from approximately 100 rural villages in the region of Sierra Madre de Chiapas. The purpose of this co-operative was to ensure that farmers were not exploited by local mediators and that members would be guaranteed fair trade prices for coffee harvests. As a result of this co-operative's initiatives, migration of indigenous peoples and their traditional Mayan culture has decreased and farmers are able to afford to send their children to complete primary and even secondary education programs. Even though globalization has proved the Latin American region to be susceptible to exploitation and vulnerability, ISMAM provides hope that capitalist incentives along with a blend of traditional social organization has potential to succeed within the global market.

-Sophie Gardner

Happy Holidays!

In light of all the holiday shopping commercials on TV these days, I’ve been thinking a lot about how although we all have way too much stuff already, our yearning to buy more and more never ceases. But very few of us wonder where all this stuff we buy comes from, where it will go when we’ve decided we no longer want it, and the effects that our stuff will have on the environment and other people all along the way. And even those of us who do wonder might have a hard time resisting the temptation to buy all that shiny new stuff anyway. Even though the ads on TV encouraging us to keep buying disgust me, I still have a hard time resisting the urge to participate, as after all, its what I’ve always done.

Right now we enjoy a lengthy disconnection from the environmental and societal effects of our stuff, but will it always be this way? As globalization spreads our economic system and our material values, and more and more people can and want to live the way we do, where will we hide our the externalized costs of all our stuff? We’ll have fewer and fewer places to export our pollution and to exploit cheap labor. Without an excess of cheap crap lining the walls of every Target and every Wal-mart, What’s going to happen to Christmas!!!

I suppose my dilemma is this- how does one accept the fact that she will never live fully ethically in such a society? I know that my actions are having effects on the environment and other people, but there’s not really anything I can do but minimize such effects by being a “responsible” consumer- drive less, buy less stuff, buy ethically-produced foods, be politically active, etc. I’ll admit, it’s not really that hard to accept. Because I don’t fully blame myself, I blame the system. And that’s what most everyone does. And “everyone” is getting a whole lot bigger. We’re all headed to the edge of a cliff, and no one can really do anything about it. But its ok for us, because we’ll never feel the effects, our children might, but probably not that badly. People in the global south feel the effects of our addiction to stuff every day, and it will be even worse for their children, but we’ll never meet them.  We have the luxury of being able to choose to care or not to care, and it’s so hard to keep caring in a system that hides its negative aspects halfway across the planet. In a world that’s so connected its become disconnected, how do we not forget to care?

Posted by Mollie Tarte

I found this article titled, "Globalization and the Epidemiology of Obesity" in the International Journal of Epidemiology.

Wang Y. Cross conducted research about the obesity of children by applying standardized consensus-based measures of body weight to relatively recent cross-sectional samples in three large nations: China, Russia, and the US.  The results were as follows: obesity and overweight were relatively common in US children while underweight was rare, the reverse was true of China, and Russia stood between the other two nations.  The study went deeper by examing the relationship between obesity and underweight children in relation to their ocioeconomic status and rural-urban residence.

It goes on to explain how this cross-national data can be evidence of globalization.  Once it defines globalization as the process of worldwide integration and unification of previously local, national, and regional phenomena into global units, it compares obesity with global governments, global corporations, global media, global food systems.  The article reads, "To the extent that obesity represents a worldwide epidemic, it constitutes a global pandemic rather than a set of independent occurrences in various nations. The crucial point in thinking about globality is that global conditions have underlying global causes and also require global interventions."

It points out that global corporations are establishing industrialized agro-food systems in almost all nations which provides consumers with constant access to unlimited amounts of relatively inexpensive calorifically dense foods to all people through supermarket, catering, vending, takeout, home delivered, drive through, and fast/snack foods.  Also, other global processes provide relatively inexpensive transportation, communication, and other activity-sparing systems through automobiles, television, and energy-saving components of the built environment that minimize physical activity levels for people worldwide.  The article holds global food systems and global vehicles, appliances, and mass media responsible for global obesity.

Here is a link to the article:  Globalization and the epidemiology of obesity

--Lauren Kelly

Globalization--Indian Farmers

This is an interview on CNN between Dr. Vandana Shiva who works with farming communities across India and Columbia University Economics Professor Jagdish Bhagwati, a former adviser to the Indian government.  They are discussing the surge in suicides among India's farmers and relating it to a system of agriculture that has higher production costs than the farmer can cover with earnings.

(CNN) - Thousands of poor farmers in India have committed suicide over the past decade as changes in India's agricultural policy set off a widening spiral of debt and despair.  It was estimated that a total of 200,000 farmers have taken their own life.

Shiva is linking the suicides to corporate control of the seeds-- "The farmer suicides started in 1997. That's when the corporate seed control started.  And it's directly related to indebtedness, and indebtedness created by two factors linked to globalization."  The two factors Shiva discusses were the ceding of control of the seed supply to the corporate chemical industry which lead to increased production costs for already-struggling farmers and the other factor being the falling food prices in a global agricultural economy.

During the interview, Shiva states, "The combination is unpayable debt, and it's the day the farmer is going to lose his land for chemicals and seeds, that is the day the farmer drinks pesticide, And it's totally related to a negative economy, of an agriculture that costs more in production than the farmer can ever earn."

On the other hand, Professor Jagdish Bhagwati, does not relate the suicide surge to globalization and he states, "There are other states in India where cotton seeds have been absorbed and which are really prosperous. So you have to ask, why is it that these are breaking out?  What's happening is very much like the subprime mortgages in the United States, where a whole bunch of salesmen went out and sold mortgages to people who couldn't afford them."

I had no idea this was going on in India. It was astonishing how Bhagwati called the death of 200,000 "insignificant". But I loved how Dr. Shiva stood her ground.  I will include a link to the video of the interview/debate.

Click the link below!
Video Interview with Dr. Shiva and Professor Jagdish Bhagwati

--Lauren Kelly

The World and it's Food

The United States is one of the few countries that has developed such a complex food system. Many parts of the process of how food begins growing and then ends up in our mouths are dependent on large companies and few farmers. However with the urban farm movement there has been a shift to producing ones own food. The film The Garden helps to illustrate how the traits of growing are not lost, how families still strive to pass on knowledge of how to farm for one's own food.


How the American food system came to be is explained well by Micheal Pollen in his article for the New York Times called The American Food System. World War II had a large affect on our food today. During the war, America had built many facilities around the country to produce bombs. And bombs are largely produced from nitrogen. So when the war was over these facilities needed a purpose. Many became used to create synthetic fertilizers. Because it was discovered that plants need nitrogen to grow. Another consequence of the war was food rationing. Throughout the war families were only allowed to buy sugar, butter and many other food products on certain days or only certain quantities. My great aunt worked at a delicatessen in West Seattle during this time and was in charge of giving customers butter. She was very strict in whom she allowed to purchase butter. As Americans adopted this type of life style they became accustom to it. After the war some communities in American volunteered to continued to live this way to help relieve many countries in Europe that were still recovering from the depression the war caused as well as the scarcity of resources such as food. However, most of the cities in the United States began to realized that they could now consume without restrictions. As as the depression continued it became important to find large quantities of food to feed the large families that were occurring during the baby boom period. My father is one of 8 children in his family and their meals consisted of non spiced cheap food that could feed all the hungry mouths my grandma had to provide for.


In conclusion the reasoning behind our complex food system that is based around comercializing that grew from economic and social periods within Americas history.


-Siera 

From America's website: an interesting history of American (sub)urbanization

A very interesting article that quite eloquently summarizes and chronicles the history of contemporary American urbanization. The article (which is a fair length) also summarizes some of the issues created by, and resolved by, (sub)urbanization, and the multidirectional flow of Americans over the last 2 centuries - first into, then out of, and more recently occasionally back into, city centers.

The article can be found here. (Courtesy of the USA Online website)

-- Nate

Urban Gardens: Urbanization vs. Agriculture

This post summarizes the situations and plights of two community-based public gardens, one located in South Central Los Angeles, California, and one located in the South Park district of South Seattle, Washington. Each of these locations and generally-diasporic organizations and the communities surrounding them face some degree of opposition from their environment and the neoliberal societal structures that surround them.

In the case of the South Central L.A. garden, the primary issue faced was one of land ownership. As expressed in the documentary film The Garden, the 14-acre set of land that once provided space for their ‘home gardens’ was originally provided by the city of Los Angeles at least partly in order to placate citizens – particularly minority ones, largely prominent in the area – after the citywide 3-day riots fueled by concerns of racial and ethnic injustices sparked (or brought to the surface) by the Rodney King case.  A backroom deal transferred legal and technical ownership of the land to a Mr. Horowitz, who beginning in 2003 threatened to evict the farmers residing upon “his land”. This spawned a large campaign and a great degree of indignation by the farmers who had previously created a true sense of place for themselves. Largely displaced from their home communities in Mesoamerica, these people and their families used the garden to bring their own ways of culture and life, not to mention farming, to life in a faraway place and culture alien to their own. The farms were indeed evicted from the original 14-acre plot, but after considerable activism, these individuals were given another (marginally smaller) plot located elsewhere in the city. Since then, they have banded together to establish a considerably-sized farm located near Bakersfield. This farming endeavor employs additional people full-time and is a fully-certified organic presence at many farmers’ markets throughout L.A.

Seattle’s Marra Farm, on the other hand, faces less threat of shady dealings due to its nature as public property (managed governmentally and by non-profit organizations). Instead, however, it faces other issues. The land upon which Marra Farm currently resides was originally owned by the Marra family, then sold to King County in 1970. In the 90s it was purchased with funds from the Open Space Bond with the understanding that it would become agricultural land. Recently, governmental interference has made clear its intended mission to transform the land into a city park that addresses pollution and runoff concerns. Part of the land has indeed remained available as farmlands for the local community at large however, which puts it ahead of the South Central L.A. gardens in that it is still alive.

Both gardens share being centered around – located in – largely diasporic communities, largely involving Mesoamerican peoples. These cultures of origin possess long histories of ecological involvement in everyday familial life, phenomenon known as kitchen gardens in some cultures for example. These communal gardens allow people, many of whom would have very limited ability to provide for themselves without them, to not only eat on a daily basis but also to provide a living, and – to look at it from the market economy viewpoint that in so many situations has been a catalyst to such situations’ demise – “contribute to society”. Such plots of land are invaluable uses of city property, especially in a society who continues to marginalize anything not owned by megalithic corporate entities. In addition to the ethical and sociological benefits brought on by such establishments, their ecological contributions are also valuable, as demonstrated by the Marra Farm’s city-sponsored intervention to help curb local pollutants through “green” efforts not altogether out of line with the project aims and ideals of the farmers that work its fields.

-- Nate

Bad Economy...Good Starbuck sales

With the economy of the US still trying to find a way to dig itself out of a hole, Starbucks reports that its sales have increased in 2010. How is that possible? This is because Starbucks has become such a mainstay in our society that even though our economy is taking a hit, people have become dependent on coffee. People are cutting back spending but can't not cut Starbucks out of their daily routine. The Starbucks brand has become a globalized monster that has taken the world by storm.

According to CNN interview with Starbuck CEO, China is the future of Starbucks sales. They plan to triple the amount of stores in China. There are even talks of growing coffee in China, which is said to provide great tasting coffee. Starbuck sales are up 15% in the US and 21% internationally even though there is an high increase in unemployment rates.

To refer to the other posts about food companies and their globalization and domination in the super markets, Starbucks is one of those companies that is seen as a Western delicacy. People spend money to buy a cup of coffee even if they might not have a stable income. The interview with Starbucks CEO said that hundreds of people in China lined up outside of a Starbucks just to buy coffee. These companies have become so interwoven into our lifestyles that their products have become necessities in everyday life.

Food Companies Suck

As the last post mentioned, the beverage market is dominated by a select few mega-companies like coca-cola. As you might imagine, this is exactly the case for pretty much any processed food item you can buy in the average grocery store. Marion Nestle mentioned in a lecture she gave at UW earlier this quarter that only about 10 different companies manufacture all the packaged food available at your average supermarket. Scary! With all the different brand names and types of food sitting on the shelves at the grocery store, it seems like we’ve got such an array of choices! But we certainly don’t have much of a choice in who our food dollars are supporting. Looking at a list of which companies own which brand names is like looking at a giant family tree. Even the major organic labels are owned by the same huge food companies, so if you’re trying to support better business practices and smaller companies, you can't really do it at the average supermarket at all. These types of organic labels tend to source food from farms that do the bare minimum to meet organic standards- basically just industrialized agriculture sans synthetic fertilizers and agrochemicals. Although eliminating the agrochemical inputs certainly helps, such practices are a far cry from sustainable, or even "environmentally friendly."

In her lecture, Marion Nestle shared a story from a trip to a small, and incredibly isolated village in India. She was astonished to see bags of lays potato chips and other highly processed foods for sale there, give how difficult it must have been to transport them there and how expensive they were relative to the average income of the local townspeople, for whom a bag of chips would cost an entire week’s salary. People buy them, she was told, because they are considered something similar to a delicacy. That food companies try desperately to sell their barely-food products to the people who need it, and can afford it, the least, just to make a little more money is a perfect example of the exploitative nature of capitalism and globalization. Only these forces could possibly create such a ridiculous situation in which people all over the world, even in the most isolated places, can, and will, buy crappy food, and in doing so, manage to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, all at the exact same time. 

Posted by Mollie Tarte

The Coca Cola System

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9PcuZSUxnk


Coke is one of the most recognized brands in the entire world. The number of people that purchase coke products reaches into the billions every year. The idea that a single product can cross borders and cultures is truly globalization in todays terms.
Coke produces a product and wishes to spread is farther and faster, reaching nearly all corners of the globe. It has become more rare to not have a coke product on a beverage menu in any restaurant than to have it available. And the coca cola system works hard to make sure that the image and brand are advertised to consumers at an early age. Advertising becomes a huge player in how products become part of one's life. and the coca cola company comes up with many innovative ways to advertise drawing upon many different emotions that people experience.
And well as many companies begin to pair up, for instance all Mcdonald's carry coke products as well as Walmart's. The merging of two large companies benefits both in terms of profits and exposure. And the more exposure the more profits.
Coke also does a good job in disguising their products from consumers that many be anti-coke. Many juice products as well as bottles waters are also manufactured by the coca cola company. However, unless the consumer picks up the bottle and reads the small print on the back of the label. They miss entirely the font stating manufactured by the coca cola company. Which in no wonder that most consumers don't realize that the beverage industry is monopolized by very few companies, mostly Pepsi and Coke. Nearly all beverages consumed around the world, particularly the United States have been made by only a few companies.
-Siera

Globalization, Urbanization, and Full Metal Jacket

Globalization: “it’s a big bullshit sandwich and we all have to take a bite!” – Full Metal Jacket 

I figured I would open with a very intellectual quote from a classic movie. Globalization isn’t quite the topic of this blog but it is very much related. Urbanization is essentially an extension of globalization and is one of the primary ways we are able to directly “view” globalization and the changes it brings upon our world. That statement might produce some degree of contention, but most anyone reading this blog (in all likelihood) can certainly agree that it is one of, if not the, most primary way(s) we interact with globalization-related issues on a daily basis.

Urbanization brings higher population density, and – hopefully, but not necessarily always, in the case of some of the world’s big slums – better/improved infrastructure. It also brings larger markets for many products, most of them consumer-related.

Urbanization essentially, if indirectly, breeds greater consumerist habits:

• Greater population density leads to decreased practicality of agricultural practices (assuming that the predecessor of urbanization is a more rural setting)
• Lessened agro-ecological self-sustainability leads to the export and rise of a agricultural practice as its own enterprise
• As infrastructure and development increases, the general complexity of life does as well. There grows increased (or a perceived increase, at least) in need for products typically considered to be consumer goods. In our society (in America), two examples of this include computers (for/in response to the increased prominence of communication) and cars (for dealing with commuting most effectively in a commute-heavy environment typical of urbanized locales).

--Nate

More on Corn

I’d like to continue the conversation on corn subsidies began last week by Michael. As Michael mentioned in his post, subsidies on corn, soy, and other commodity crops have created serious issues for not only farmers and citizens of our own country, but those in the rest of the world as well. One way that subsidies can hurt both farmers and eaters stems from the fact that subsidies promote overproduction. If farmers get paid more for producing more, they inevitably will, which floods the market with an excess of these crops, lowering their prices. This results in two things- One, farmers make less money than they would had the subsidies never existed due to the huge reductions in prices they receive for their crops. Two, we now have a whole bunch of cheap corn and soy and nothing (conventional anyway) to do with it. So some very smart people figured out that we can put it into processed foods and feed it to our livestock, making the production of both of these much cheaper. Great! Except now our government is basically footing part of the bill every time we buy fast or processed food, and we need to feed our livestock a bunch of antibiotics to keep their new grain-based diet from killing them (most livestock cannot properly digest grain, and without antibiotics it can kill them in as little as 6 months). So now we have the problem that a third of our country will soon likely have diabetes from the unhealthy diet our government is helping to pay for, and many new strains of antibiotic resistant viruses that have been created from the huge amount of antibiotics used on livestock (I think about 50% of all the antibiotics in the US are used on livestock).

The corn subsidies hurt farmers in other countries because in most cases their government is not subsidizing them, so the prices their crops fetch on the global market often do not even cover the cost of production, let alone allow the farmers to make a decent livelihood. Another consequence on farmers and people in other countries results from the export of the ideology of commodity-crop subsidies and the industrial agricultural model in general. When we export our agricultural model, we also export the problems that result from it, like diabetes, obesity, and increased antibiotic resistance. And as other countries begin to subsidize their crops, the problem becomes one that cannot even be fixed by eliminating our own subsidies, as crop prices would stay low and our farmers would not be able to compete in global markets.

Obviously subsidies are not a good idea, but now we’re kind of stuck with them, as without them it seems that a very large portion of our country’s farmers would go bankrupt. Global food prices would probably increase, seriously effecting food security in poorer nations and probably within the US as well. The only possible semi-solution I can think of would be to very slowly decrease subsidies on commodity crops, and begin to subsidize other crops and more sustainable methods of agriculture. But there would inevitably be problems with this solution, and I kind of doubt that it would be politically feasible in the near future. I wonder if anyone else has any ideas on how we could effectively eliminate commodity crop subsidies, or would like to weigh in the issue in general.

Posted by Mollie Tarte 

Subsidized Corn

As you may know, corn is one of the main U.S. agricultural crops. If you have seen the movie 'Food inc.', then you might also know that the united states subsidizes it's production of corn. Through subsidizing corn, the production cost of beef and poultry are lowered. This is because most meat we consume are fed corn rather than allowing the animals to graze since corn is so readily available and can be purchased at such a low rate. It's true, this might seem nice when your at the grocery store looking to purchase meat or you're out at a restaurant ordering a steak because the prices will obviously be cheaper. I've never heard of anyone complaining that something was too cheap when they're spending their money to purchase it. Unfortunately, this is only the small picture. Aside from the negative health impacts some corn bi-products may have on consumers, there is also the matter of how this could affect other developing countries.

The United States is producing so much corn at such low production costs that it is inevitably effecting other countries. The U.S. exports corn and corn bi-products to other countries such as Brazil, Mexico, etc., where there are those who depend on farming to make a living. With the U.S. exporting to these countries at such low costs, those who farm in these developing countries cannot compete, thus poverty progresses. Is it really worth it?

Posted by Michael Huang

Life and Debt

Life and Debt is a film regarding the life in the country of Jamaica. The majority of the film discusses how urbanization has hit the communities of Jamaica, as well as how the government is striving to stay afloat in an ever increasing demand for capitalist goods.

There is demands for goods to be produced at the cheapest price possible to the manufacturer, however is this a living wage for the workers of that good? We begin to see how with urbanization there become a shift towards goods being produced elsewhere. Suddenly even basic needs such as food are being shipped from other parts of the state, country, or even internationally. This system can cause struggling countries, like Jamaica, to become trapped in a financial crisis. Where an economy is poor therefore workers begin to take any job available. Many of these jobs turning out to be underpaid and highly dangerous. However, if no job is taken no money can be made to survive. And without rights given to many workers the companies demanding the product keep tight regulations on the benefits, if any, given to the workers.

Urbanization blinds those directly in the system, we begin to not question aspects of our society. The system allows for outsourcing to be highly valued while not discussing where the outsourcing is being taken place or under what conditions it is occurring.

Posted by Siera Miller

The Story of Stuff!

I’m sure many of you have already seen Annie Leonard’s youtube video, The Story of Stuff. But, I figured I’d post it anyway since it’s just so good. The video essentially discusses all the terrible consequences of mass consumerism and the capitalist mindset in general. Although that might seem like a hopelessly depressing topic for a youtube video, it’s actually not so bad. Not to say that it’s not depressing- it is- but I think it really sums up the problems with our consumerist, capitalistic, and globalized world society in a very simple (and slightly cute) way.

After considering the video in terms of “globalization,” I began wondering whether or not globalization and consumerism are mutually exclusive. Today’s “globalized” world seems to be based around a foundation of consumerism; as a country becomes more “globalized,” it generally tends to also increase the amount it consumes. Yet, could another “globalized” reality exist without such a foundation, or is consumerism too central to the concept of globalization? Any thoughts? 

Posted By Mollie Tarte

PC Gaming to Globalization

On July 27, 2010, Blizzard Entertainment released the highly anticipated real-time strategy (RTS) game known as Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty. Starcraft II (SC2) is the sequel to the award-winning RTS released back in 1998 known as Starcraft (SC). Since its release in 1998, the Starcraft franchise has risen to the top of the RTS gaming industry as the most popular real-time strategy game of all-time. Starcraft II seeks to break the records held by its predecessor and impact the gaming industry on a global level.

No where else can the impact of the Starcraft franchise be seen more clearly than in South Korea. The American-developed game has taken South Korea by storm and has been doing so since 1998. The popularity of Starcraft in Korea has become so well-known that players from all over the world visit or move to South Korea just to play the game. International corporations have now recognized SC’s global popularity and have begun to sponsor Starcraft teams and tournaments in Korea and all over the world. One example of the type of money these teams and players are competing for is the monthly Global Starcraft II League (GSL) tournament in Seoul, Korea where the winner takes home 100,000,000 KRW (aprox. $85,700 USD). With professional teams and players vying for lucrative winnings, many have come to see Starcraft as a national sport much like any other sport such as soccer.

So you might wonder what Starcraft and “globalization” have in common and I believe the following quote is something that ties them both together. According to Mauro F. Guillén, who wrote an article titled “Is Globalization Civilizing, Destructive or Feeble?, one specific quote caught my attention. “Intuitively, globalization is a process fueled by, and resulting in, increasing cross-border flows of goods, services, money, people, information, and culture (Guillen, 2001, 236)."

With myself being a casual Starcraft gamer, the news about the game’s impact on South Korea came to mind as I read that line. With its ever increasing popularity and global appeal, Starcraft has essentially become a transnational entity that traverses national boundaries. It has increased the “cross-border flow” of money as seen with the retail sales, the countless international sponsorships from corporations and so on. It has also allowed the exchange of information and culture through the many individuals who travel from around the world to take part in this gaming phenomenon. With Starcraft, also comes the unique gaming culture. One that is filled with individuals of countless backgrounds. This culture has begun to grow and has quickly expanded around the world and is beginning to become more widely accepted as seen with South Korea’s adoption of the Starcraft franchise.

Globalization/Urbanization

Here's our blog. Start blogging team!


Posted by Michael Huang