Globalization means a lot to international corporate organizations and governments across the world, particularly when it comes to governance and public administration. The different forms of globalization define the numerous challenges facing corporate organizations and the civil administrative institutions of many countries.
Here, note that globalization plays the role of shaping the current trends in the global economic markets and the increasing interactions among nations and people from different parts of the world. On the other hand, the new forms of interactions among nations imply that the contemporary governments must assume new roles and functions, and thus, globalization impacts governance and public administration in different ways.
Several research studies have examined and documented the implications of globalization on the type of governance being practiced by different governments and international corporate organizations such as the World Bank and the United Nations (Abonyi & Van Slyke, 2010; Farazmand, 2009; Feiock, Moon, & Park, 2008; Xu & Weller, 2009).
Globalization poses critical challenges to governments and corporate organizations around the world. These challenges include the need to understand the dynamics of global value chains, creating trade facilitation structures, developing partnerships, and the establishment of value chains and networks (Abonyi & Van Slyke, 2010).
Moreover, the emergence of new challenges in governance means that the traditional administrative styles are no longer appropriate or effective in addressing contemporary problems (Farazmand, 2009). Other implications of globalization are associated with the increasing volume of trade and the rapid changes in the labor markets across the globe.
This paper discusses the major themes, the methods of inquiry, and the findings/conclusions of four different articles on globalization and its implications for governance and public administration. Furthermore, this paper provides a personal assessment of the quality of arguments and the significance of the conclusions provided.
Major Themes
The author(s) of the articles reviewed in this paper provides important insights into the topic of globalization and its implications for governance. According to Abonyi and Van Slyke (2010), the globalization of production poses special challenges to many governments and public institutions.
While exploring the key challenges facing different economies in Southeast Asia, the authors noted that many governments and public institutions face the challenge of recognizing the need to establish global value chains as globalization enhances competition in international trade and production. Furthermore, governments and public institutions face the challenge of transforming the domestic import-export systems and other trade procedures to facilitate trade in a globally interconnected and networked environment.
In addition, with increased globalization, governments and public institutions must embrace the need to invest more in logistics systems to facilitate international production, trade, and investments. Lastly, globalization has also magnified the need for governments to strengthen the domestic enterprise clusters to ensure that they benefit from the numerous opportunities arising from global value chains (Abonyi & Van Slyke, 2010).
On the other hand, Farazmand (2009) shows that one of the most critical implications of globalization for governance and public administration entails the changes it brings to the traditional administrative systems. Evidently, the traditional methods of governance and public administration do not offer the required solutions to address the challenges arising from globalization.
According to Farazmand (2009), globalization brings with it many rapid changes and opportunities on one hand, and increased competition and uncertainties on the other. As a result, there is the imperative need for governments and public institutions to consider building new administrative systems with the capacity to address the challenges associated with globalization and other global changes.
There are many ways of managing the challenges produced by globalization. Some of these strategies include renewing the administrative structures in the public sector, developing new strategic capacities in governance, and building new collaborative partnerships on the foundation of transparency and accountability (Farazmand, 2009).
From another perspective, Feiock et al. (2008) examines the relationship between governance, globalization, and economic development by revisiting the discussion on whether the world is flat or spiky. Apparently, in this discussion, different scholars share divergent views on the implications of globalization on economic development.
In this article, Richard Feiock and his colleagues examine the arguments presented by Thomas Friedman, a columnist with the New York Times, who claims that the “world is flat”, and Richard Florida, a social scientist, who insists that the “world is spiky” (Feiock et al., 2008). According to Friedman, the advancement of information technology, which is a crucial ingredient for globalization, paints a flat picture of the world in that it allows people to participate in global economic development from anywhere in the world.
As a result, governments should seize the opportunity of educating their citizens and give them the necessary skills to compete in economic development at the global front. On the other hand, Florida contends that the information technology age creates an environment whereby areas with many creative minds will always be ahead in terms of economic development because such areas have the capacity to attract other creative minds from elsewhere in the world by offering them better amenities and socio-cultural climates.
This implies that economic development relies on the ability of governments to create the necessary conditions to attract the creative minds from all over the world to one centralized place (Feiock et al., 2008). Nonetheless, Feiock et al. (2008) argue that the world is neither flat nor spiky owing to its interconnectedness and networked nature, and thus a country’s competitive advantage in economic development is a subject of interdependence and collaboration.
Lastly, Xu and Weller (2009) provide an excellent example of how globalization affects governance in international corporate organizations by examining the case of Chrik Poortman, a member of the World Bank staff. This article profiles the career and experiences of Mr. Poortman, who has risen through the ranks as a World Bank staff and occupied various positions, including the vice presidency.
According to Xu and Weller (2009), a World Bank professional assumes many responsibilities, which include working for development; acting as the link between donors, client countries, and factions; providing the required leadership, strategic advice, and support to others; and standing up for the interests of the clients, staff, and the bank itself.
It is even more challenging when a World Bank professional works in an interconnected and networked environment such as the one created by globalization because it requires one to move from one continent to another while learning and acquiring new sets of skills in leadership and international governance.
Furthermore, considering the characteristics of the World Bank’s clientele, the success of an international civil servant such as Poortman depends on his or her ability to understand the unique circumstances facing each client to provide leadership and support by assessing the inherent opportunities and challenges (Xu & Weller, 2009).
Methods of Inquiry
The author(s) of the four articles reviewed in this paper used different methods of inquiry to highlight the implications of globalization for governance and public administration. Abonyi and Van Slyke (2010) employed a qualitative descriptive research method to collect data from the representatives of governments, civil societies, and the private sector in 15 countries within the Southeast Asia region.
Further, the authors collected additional data from case studies, interviews, reviews of secondary documents, and analyses of the experiences of international corporate organizations such as the World Band and other agencies affiliated with the United Nations. As a result, this article provides a first-hand account of how globalization of production affects governance, public administration, and the public-private relationships in different parts of Southeast Asia.
On the other hand, Farazmand (2009) used a descriptive review approach to examine the implications of globalization on the traditional administrative systems in the midst of rapid changes, increased competition, and hyper-uncertainty. The author presents credible and theoretically grounded arguments based on his earlier publications and other peer-reviewed studies.
From a different angle, Feiock et al. (2008) employed a comparative critical analysis approach grounded in theory to examine the claims made by two other authors on the relationship between globalization, governance, and economic development.
The study begins by looking at the arguments provided by the two scholars on the effect of information technology on economic development before proceeding to give a well-balanced account on the same issue, but from the perspective of globalization and its implications for governance and public administration.
Lastly, Xu and Weller (2009) used a real-life qualitative case study to analyze the impact of globalization on the operations of international corporate organizations such as the World Bank and the United States. From Chrik Poortman’s portfolio, the authors managed to highlight the efforts, skills, and experiences that go into building a successive career as an international civil servant in a highly interconnected and networked world.
Key Findings and Conclusions
In their analyses, Abonyi and Van Slyke (2010) found out that the governments of Southeast Asia faced numerous challenges because of globalization. Some of these challenges include the need to understand global value chains, establishing structures to facilitate global trade, and investing more in logistics systems.
In response to these challenges, the authors recommended that there is the need for governments and public administrators to seek multi-stakeholder partnerships to participate actively in the globalized world economy.
Moreover, they noted that it is essential for governments to recognize that their roles and responsibilities are changing and start embracing their new roles related to facilitating global governance and public administration. On the other hand, in his detailed review, Farazmand (2009) found out that there are three key challenges facing the traditional administrative systems including rapid globalization, increased competition, and hyper-complexity in governance and public administration.
As a result, the author noted that there is the imperative need for governments and public administrative institutions to take note of these challenges and work toward building governance, organizational, institutional, policy, and administrative capacities to manage the said challenges. Furthermore, it is essential for governments and public institutions to develop collaborative partnerships with other global partners to enhance governance and public administration.
Based on their critical analysis, Feiock et al. (2008) discovered that both Friedman and Florida differed widely in the way they approached the focus, imperatives, main actors, the role of governments, and policy implications in relation to economic development, governance, and globalization.
According to Friedman’s arguments, the advances in technology, which are at the center of globalization, contribute to the establishment of structures through which anyone can participate in economic development from anywhere in the world.
On the other hand, Florida argues that technological advancements create a situation whereby economic development is limited to certain parts of the world, which have the potential to attract the creative minds of the world. From a neutral angle, Feiock et al. (2008) concluded that both Friedman and Florida are wrong in their arguments because economic development is a subject of collaboration and interdependence among partnerships comprising of one or more governments.
Finally, in their case study, Xu and Weller (2009) concluded that the key members of international corporate organizations must be ready and willing to assume leadership skills and use their fair judgment in making decisions that affect billions of people. Here, the authors noted that World Bank staff should not make judgments based on bureaucratic rules, but they should try to assess the inherent challenges and opportunities with the aim of reducing the bureaucratic risk.
Personal Assessment
From a personal perspective, the author(s) of the articles reviewed in the preceding discussions provide well-informed arguments based on the analysis of data collected from credible sources. For example, Abonyi and Van Slyke (2010) make a strong case for the implications of globalization of production on governance and public administration in Southeast Asia by collecting and analyzing data from multiple sources including interviews, document reviews, and analyses of the experiences of international organizations.
Further, Farazmand (2009) presents strong and balanced arguments for the need to build new administrative systems to address the challenges arising from globalization, some of which are difficult to address using the traditional administrative methods. Here, the author relies on his experience as a senior academic staff teaching public administration at an institution of higher learning to analyze the subject matter of the topic and backing his arguments with different peer-reviewed studies.
On the other hand, Feiock and his colleagues provide an appropriate way of examining the impact of globalization on governance and economic development by first highlighting the arguments of scholars from the different sides of the debate before making their well-informed and balanced contributions from a theoretical perspective.
Therefore, the authors manage to make credible arguments by identifying gaps in the existing literature concerning the subject matter of the topic under review. Finally, Xu and Weller (2009) base their arguments on a real-life case study, which offers them a first-hand experience of how different aspects of globalization affect various international corporate organizations such as the World Bank and the United Nations.
The information provided in this article is credible because the authors interviewed members of the World Bank’s senior management team who have a vast experience in matters to do with governance and public administration in different parts of the world.
Overall, note that the conclusions made by the author(s) of the articles reviewed in this paper are very significant to the key stakeholders in governance and public administration. Apparently, the purpose of the four sections is to look at a given aspect of globalization and its implications for management and public administration. As a result, the author(s) provide a variety of conclusions and recommendations drawn from their analysis of the underlying issues.
Based on these conclusions and recommendations, the key stakeholders in governance and public administration have a more significant role to play in terms of implementing the recommendations and reduce the risk of the challenges of globalization in the end. Furthermore, these conclusions can go a long way in terms of informing public policy formulation to address the challenges and opportunities arising from globalization.
References
Abonyi, G., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2010). Governing on the edges: Globalization of production and the challenges to public administration in the twenty-first century. Public Administration Reviews, 70(S1), S33-S45.
Farazmand, A. (2009). Building administrative capacity for the age of rapid globalization: A modest prescription for the twenty-first century. Public Administration Review, 69(6), 1007-1020.
Feiock, R. C., & Moon, M. J., & Park, H. J. (2008). Is the world “Flat” or “Spiky”? Rethinking the governance implications of globalization for economic development. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 24-35.
Xu, Y. C., & Weller, P. (2009). Chrik Poortman: A World Bank professional. Public Administration Review, 69(5), 868-875.