Effects of Globalization and Increased Modernity on Indigenous and Native Populations across the World Essay

Introduction

It is undoubtedly clear that globalization is one of the hotly debated topics over the past century. Many scholars, and researchers alike, equate this increased debate to the tremendous impacts that have resulted from globalization.

Various cultures and countries have been able to respond differently to globalization and the myriad of effects that come with it. In this paper, the major focus is going to be on assessing the impact of globalization and increased modernity throughout the world—with a special case study on Singapore.

However, in doing so, other related countries—especially those in Asia that have contributed to Singapore’s globalization in one way or another—will also be mentioned. But before we delve further into highlighting these issues, what do we really mean when we talk of globalization?

Preliminarily, Streeten (1998) asserts that “globalization is transforming trade, finance, employment, migration, technology, communications, the environment, social systems, ways of living, cultures, and patterns of governance.” In essence, his definition is hugely pegged on the concept of liberalization due to the tearing down of economic market barriers.

Moreover, Goyal (2006, p.1) says that “the term Globalization refers to the integration of economies of the world through uninhibited trade and financial flows, as also through mutual exchange of technology and knowledge.”

This definition is additionally supported by Britton (2010) who affirms that, in Globalization, barriers to trade are vehemently broken down so as to pave way for reduced capital controls and the cutting down of transportation costs. In turn, this promotes efficacy of economic markets and smooth running of trade.

It is inherent to note that increased modernity mostly comes as a result of endeavors such as globalization and industrialization.

Essentially, globalization in Singapore did not just begin recently; its roots can be traced back to the early years of industrial revolution where social, political and economic changes were taking place across Asia, Europe and as well as other parts of the world (Koh, 2010, p.21-23).

From that time up to now, globalization in Singapore has witnessed immense revolution; taking a lot of economic twists and turns to make it the vital business force it is today (Amaldas, 2009, p.982-983). All these are embodied in the circumspect discussions done below.

Social, Political, and Cultural Impacts of Globalization and Increased Modernity on Populations across the World—Case Study on Singapore

Causes of Globalization and Increased Modernity

Fundamentally, there are many factors that have catalyzed the evolution of globalization in Singapore. These can, however, be scholarly summarized under the umbrella of three factors namely: technological, economic and sociopolitical factors.

Starting with the technological factors, it is notable that there are innumerable technologies that have propelled Globalization. However, the inception of the internet is considered as the most important of them all based on the fact that many other technologies used today sprouted from it.

In relations to this, Britton (2010) asserts that since the creation of the Internet in 1973 by the United States defense advanced research projects agency (DARPA); there has been an escalated growth of globalization across the world—including countries in Asia like Singapore.

Regarding economic factors, Britton (2010) articulates that the formation of institutions like banks, diversification of products as well as services and financial market revolutions (among many other economic factors) have importantly provided a framework both national and international commerce.

In effect, this has facilitated the advancement of Globalization (Velayutham, 2007, p.20-25). More specifically, Amaldas (2009, p.985) states that the “synchronization of local financial regulations and policies with international standards” is a key reason for the increased modernity in Singapore.

Lastly, sociopolitical factors basically refer to both social and political contributors to globalization. According to Shuja (2001), the constant worldwide shifts in sociopolitical set-ups of countries, regions or even continents have enormously steered globalization to its current course. Amaldas (2009, p.984-985) explicates this by citing the good democracy in Singapore which has encouraged good sociopolitical relations within the country.

As a result of the peaceful coexistence of social and political facets in Singapore, the advancement of globalization has been hugely fuelled as opposed to countries such as Russia where the opposite scenario limits progress. So how have these factors impacted the populations in Singapore?

As partly aforementioned, globalization has impacted greatly on many economies—both for indigenous and native populations. These impacts shift from positive to negative depending on the development level of an economy (Ernst & Young, 2011). The analysis below is therefore going to concurrently assess both the positive and negative impacts of globalization in Singapore.

It is from these implications that we will be able to know whether the indigenous and native populations in Singapore have benefited or not from globalization.

Positive Impacts of globalization and increased Modernity

According to Amaldas (2009), globalization has immensely improved the communication systems in Singapore (p.985). This is based on the reported reductions in telecommunication systems due to the constant inception of new communication technologies (p.985-986). Just like in most countries across the world, the internet—through services like email and instant messaging—has resulted in a global ‘explosion’ of communication and information (Britton 2010).

Based on the ‘explosion’, people are able to communicate easily and conduct their trade without the telecommunication hiccups that were eminent before the betterment of these communication systems. On top of that, the evolution and use of social media has also greatly improved the economy in Singapore due to better advertisement and marketing schemes that are typical of social media (Amaldas, 2009, 989-990).

The removal of travel barriers as well as the opening of borders, as a result of globalization, is a major contributing factor to the improved economic output in Singapore (Ernst & Young, 2011). Essentially, the removal of trade barriers has benefited Singapore it opens us up avenues for them to spread their market tentacles so as to further improve their economic input wile bettering socialization of the natives of the country.

Through the increased modernity in Singapore, their marketing has become much better because they can now travel easily to good trading destinations like China, India or even the USA (Velayutham, 2007, p.41-45).

To a large extent, the technological advancements that have resulted from Globalization, or the Globalization that have resulted from technological advancements, tend to favor developed economies more than they do in the ones that are developing (Streeten).

Essentially, this is based on the fact that most developed economies tend to have fully fledged economic systems that are easily augmented by better technologies. This is the major reason why Singapore—which is a developed country—has been able to greatly benefit from technological advancements.

In essence, natives of Singapore tend to have more access to better services and facilities in the country than the immigrants. For this reason, these natives get to enjoy the technologies more than the immigrants. However, on a general level, globalized technologies, if used appropriately, can be of immense help to both immigrants and natives. Explicatively, Britton (2010) notes that technologies like the Internet make it easy for access to certain goods and services thus propelling businesses while helping to unify various economies.

Crucially, globalization in Singapore has been able to facilitate the development of national, regional and international structures of governance which vital for the growth of economies (Waltz, 1999, p.697). Basic examples here include the European Union, the United Nations, the African Union and the Asian Union, among thousands of other governance factions formed due to Globalization.

The greatly progressive democratic leadership in Singapore also stands as an example of how globalization can better a country’s governance (Velayutham, 2007, p.21-25). In 2005, for example, Singapore was able to improve its governance and leadership systems by entering into the Asia-Middle East Dialogue, the famed Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) signed between Singapore and India and the Shangri-la dialogues, among many others (Amaldas, 2009, p.986).

All the above-mentioned dialogues that were purposefully made to help in improve governance in Singapore and the collaborating countries would have not taken place had it not been for globalization.

Globalization has significantly led to the creation of job opportunities for more people. A candid perception amongst economists is that the more developed a nation-state is; the more opportunities it offers in terms of employment (Streeten, 1998).

This is, in fact, the reason why there has been a substantial increase in the number of people from Asia moving into Singapore in the quest for greener pastures with regards to better working opportunities. An example of these migrants is the Chinese who, according to Amaldas (2009, p.990-992), constitute a large number of the immigrants in Singapore.

The increase in better job opportunities in Singapore is additionally typified by the ever increasing percentages in the familiar trend of rural-urban migration within the country. With globalization, industrialization has strongly emerged in urban centres like Singapore (which, apparently, is the capital city of Singapore).

Negative Impacts of Globalization and Increased Modernity

One of the major negative effects of globalization and increased modernity is classism. Essentially, classism refers to the social classes formed in a particular place based on social disintegration.

In as much as separation of people based on their background or economic potentialities is vital in tailoring methods of improving economies; unfavourable separations (like between natives and immigrants) is very dangerous for the growth of an economy (Streeten, 1998). Shuja (2001) supports this point by saying that “paradoxically, this globalization, far from creating a homogeneous global society, is subjecting societies to a logic of disintegration.”

As a result of the disintegration, there is a continued widening of the—already large—gap between the rich and the poor—as is typified in some sections of Singapore. Notably, the current classism is mostly witnessed in form of ethnicity and racialism based on the fact that most global integrations either take place between various counties or regions.

In summary of the negative effects of globalization in Singapore, Amaldas (2009, p.985-995), asserts that globalization and increased modernity has encouraged lawlessness, unemployment in some regions, inequalities, terrorism, violence, civil wars, and increased levels of corruption, among many others.

Apart from the abovementioned impacts of globalization (both positive and negative); there are several other general ramifications including (but not limited to): encouraging both positive and negative competition amongst various economies, increasing, and sometimes reducing, the life expectancy of productive people in the society, change of consumer trends which ultimately affect the success or failure of economies, volatility of markets—especially financial markets like Forex and Stock markets, and the betterment or deterioration of environment—depending on human activity in a place.

Recommendations and Conclusion

Based on the above implications, it is evidently noteworthy to say that globalization has been a key aspect in the development of Singapore. Nevertheless, relevant steps should be taken to mitigate its questionable (negative) impacts so as to ensure sustainability in its positive progress.

Some of the steps/recommendations that have been proposed by various scholars towards the improvement of globalization and its effects are given below.

To begin with, the highly diversified nature of global markets calls a lot of rationalization from the people involved in it. Essentially, firms are obligated to make some critical decisions in order to ensure that their engagement in international businesses does not negatively impact on the domestic markets.

Singapore—being a globally-oriented company—should also strive to ensure that it keeps a lid on the interrelations with other global communities (Amaldas, 2009, p.986-988).

Moreover, the expansive and far-reaching effects of global crises—like the 2008 global crisis—provided numerous lessons and possible solutions not only to individuals, but to corporations and governments alike. For instance, individuals, corporations and even countries should ensure that they adequately prepare for the plunging of economies (Goyal, 2006, p.1-6).

Additionally, proper regulation of domestic banking and financial institutions can be an invaluable solution to solving economic challenges which, in turn, mitigates the melting down of economies (Shuja, 2001).

Essentially, this involves the creation of strong financial reserves that can withstand the pressure of shaky economic times. The regulation should not only be on local level but even on the international arena as well.

Again, balancing trade-offs of local responsiveness and global integration in Singapore can be done by setting logical business targets; then working towards them (Streeten, 1998). By setting logical targets, the country’s global operations can easily be checked and balanced relevantly.

Furthermore, Streeten says that, amidst rationalizing its targets, countries and business entities must ensure that they take a keen note of both domestic and global competitions. By doing this, companies will be assured of not having to slip up against its competitors (Norberg, 2001).

As a candid rule, Singapore should asses its potentiality before deciding to expand its horizons. In the assessment, factors like nature of businesses, type of products and services it offers and availability of prospective market, among others, should be duly considered (Streeten, 1998).

For instance, a firm that only has products that is only used in one region should only focus on that region alone since that is the place that will give them maximum outputs.

Finally, Singapore must ensure that it has clear guidelines on the strategies that will be used across the country in its globalization endeavors.

Without a good plan, the country opens a vista of opportunities for several hazardous possibilities like not being able to calmly contend with the dynamics of globalized markets. Other things that should be balanced include: standardization against adaptation, concentration against dispersion and autonomy against dependence, among many others (Shuja, 2001).

In conclusion, it is worth recapitulating that, just in the same way global alliances play a crucial role in the advancement of nations; these nations also have a consequential role in the advancement or retrogression of international alliances.

In other words, both the nation and the globalized endeavors can build or destroy each another. The case of Singapore and globalization interrelate and influence each other typify this symbiotic relationship.

It is therefore important that caution is taken so that neither of the two oversteps each other’s boundaries in the quest for development and competitive advantage sustainability. It is only through this that both globalization and progress can be furthered while their challenges are mitigated in Singapore and other parts of the world as well.

References

Amaldas, M. (2009). The Management of Globalization in Singapore: Twentieth Century Lessons for the Early Decades of the New Century. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 1: 982-1002.

Britton, S. (2010). The impact of globalization and its consequences for the individual society. Web.

Ernst & Young. Singapore takes third spot on globalization index. Web.

Goyal, K. A. (2006). Impact of globalization on developing countries (with special reference to India), International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 5: 1-6.

Koh, A. (2010). Tactical Globalization: Learning from the Singapore Experiment. New York: Peter Lang.

Norberg, J. (2001). In defense of global capitalism. (Translation: Roger Tanner). Stockholm: Timbro.

Shuja, S. M. (2001). Coping with globalization. Web.

Streeten, P. (1998). Globalization: threat or opportunity? Web.

Velayutham, S. (2007). Responding to globalization: nation, culture and identity in Singapore. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

Waltz, K. (1999). Globalization and governance. PS: Political Science and Politics, 32, (4), p.693-700.