Critically outline the key aspects of globalisation and discuss the importance this has for criminology

Critically outline the key aspects of globalisation and discuss the importance this has for criminology

Globalization can be described as a process by which national and regional economies, societies and cultures have become integrated through the global network of trade, communication, immigration and transportation. It is therefore the growth of interdependence between national economies and has resulted in a trend towards global markets, global production and global competition. To explain globalization various theories and models have been put forward which will be discussed in-depth in this piece of work.
According to Schifferes (2012) Globalisation is the process by which the world is becoming increasingly interconnected as a result of massively increased trade and cultural exchange. It has increased the production of goods and services. Big companies are no longer national firms but multinational corporations with subsidiaries in many countries. Globalisation has always been in existence but has speeded up enormously over the last century. It has resulted in increased international trade, recognition of companies and companies operating in more than one country. It can be criticised that globalisation has not helped to create wealth in developing countries to close the gaps between the poor people and the rich people as most jobs in these countries require skilled workers who speak English.
One school of thought dates to the emergence of globalization back to the nineteenth century thus basing on the assertion of four phases of globalization that can be drawn up. The first phase came about due to improvements in transportation and automation that enabled reliable long distance trade and it reached its zenith in 1880. This technical advancement improved information transfer which in turn helped firms manage their supply chain.
The first decades of the twentieth century saw the height of phase two. Due to tight competition and over flooded markets in Europe territories under European colonial rule, they were seen as profitable sites to establish multinational subsidies. American corporations also expanded into profitable European markets. However the great depression of 1929 is perceived to have been the death knell of this phase. As a result of this collapse in the financial markets many governments started to look at internal policies as opposed to foreign policies.
The third phase resulted from the end of World War II. During the war there were stiff tariff barriers and these were lowered at the end of the war as trade conditions became wealthier and the effects of war wore off. There was a massive demand for consumer goods because individuals simply had more money to use. Though seriously war torn countries struggled, it presented an opportunity for the least affected economies or countries like the USA to become superpowers and dominant in terms of globalization.
Phase four is a combination of factors; it includes both technical advancement and the global status quo. Technological advancement like global availability of computers linked to the internet, increase in cellphone use and development of robotics both for the tracking components and finished goods and the automation of production make up one part. These factors have affected even banking and tourism sectors. In addition proximity is no longer an issue since interaction is now easy even from a long distance. The second part is the political environment and economic and internal foreign policies which have allowed companies to benefit from the technological advancement stated above, is an apparent sign that there has been much convergence of global economic thinking, by a number of countries moving towards acceptable and liberal free market ideas. It can be noted that during this phase social trends also change as consumers become less concerned with products’ national identities.
Levitt (1983) was one of the first academics to write about globalization. In 1983 he said that technology is the driving force behind the globalization of markets and, thus, a converging commonality in countries around the planet. According to scholars like Levitt we are headed to a globalized market were products become unified in other words irrecoverable homogenization. Due to the availability and cheap price of product local tastes and preferences will cease as people in their numbers will opt for the easily available and cheaper product translating to huge profits for global corporations benefiting from huge economies of scale.
The above assertion however, suggests that products can be standardized but some scholars beg to differ. Ohmae (1989) suggests that some products cannot be global. In different countries people have different wants and needs and this affects the type of products they require.it therefore becomes difficult to make products uniform. Douglas and Wind (1987) point out that the barriers to standardization and the fact that companies cannot ignore consumer needs .They can however make minor changes to the products to make them more suitable and this avoids duplication of efforts .The emphasis is perhaps, best summed up by Kenichi Ohmae’s phrase “Think globally act locally”. Companies should therefore see globe as one market but tailor it for different markets. Levitt’s converging commonality does seem to support a number of markets like cell phone industries were consumers willingly buy the latest gadgets .The clothing industry is another such market especially the sports sector where sport kits are standardized. The food industries however differ because of the different tastes that people have because in certain countries food choice may vary even though the branding of a food chain may not change. This shows the complexity of customer needs and this led to much debate among scholars .Industries therefore face a lot of challenges when they are intending to globalize their products. Yip (2003) states the purpose of understanding global forces, help companies to identify critical factors in reaching worldwide success.
Over and above globalization has been on the rise even with its own share of problems, like the credit crunch (fall of the financial markets) of 2008.Some major cooperation have shut down their expansion policies but the advancement of globalization has not been nullified for the past 30 years –Global responses are however needed to counter such global problems and it is possible to use PESTLE C model to look at these forces driving globalization.
The above assertion has led to the need for world Institutions which deal with matters on a global scale like WTO, UN and the World Bank. The international police are another good example where countries have set up international police organization to counter white collar and cybercrime on a global scale. The internet has also aided in this globalization with sites such as e-bay whereby people can buy and sell items anywhere in the world from the comforts of their homes. Global production and global completion and global brands, such as Nike, Toyota and Wimpy are now common places across all continents. Mergers are also common across boards throughout the 1990s and beyond until the economic downturn of 2008 which has slowed the process.
Levitt’s idea can also cemented by the increase to mobility whereby people get awareness and leading to social and cultural developments towards globalization. It all leads to a converging lifestyle. Social platforms like high 5, Facebook and twitter have aided in a globalized world. Ecological awareness is also developing a global reach with international treaties. For example, the Kyoto Protocol agreed in 1992 and ratified by the majority of the world’s national governments (but not the USA) indicated a growing international agreement to recognize and combat the threat to humanity from increasing economic activity.
A lot of debates have happened in trying to figure out whether globalization is good or bad. Though it causes interaction and it intertwines ideas and trade it may lead to interdependence which might be bad in some cases. A country might lose sense of belonging or ability to survive on its own. Globalization also tends to favour stronger economies who can afford to sway and dictate the global markets. Some weaker economies may fail to complete in the global world and some international laws and standards may be difficult for them to keep up with.
Offshoring is another issue that needs to be put into consideration. This is whereby companies move their companies to other locations and this has a negative impact on the parent countries because they lose jobs and tax returns. On the flip side offshoring creates employment in other countries where the company relocates to, but loss of employment to parent countries, thus making it a double edged sword. An example of off-shoring was the transfer of call centres from UK to India or from USA to Puerto Rico. The effects of offshoring are therefore beneficial to the less developed countries where the big companies relocate to. Although employment opportunity arises from this offshoring, these multinational companies have been at times been accused of making their employees work under harsh conditions and for a poor enumeration and at times even child labour used. Major cooperation’s such as Matalan, Gap, Next, Nike are being edged therefore to enforce rigid standards throughout their supply chain.
Young (1980 cited in Taylor 1988), argued that changes in Western societies in the 1980s and 1990s contributed to a rise in crime rates. He looked at the impact of inequality and globalisation in society. He argues that globalisation has encouraged criminal behaviour and theft which evolved from the ‘New Right’ policies of political leaders George Bush and Margaret Thatcher. The realists and the Marxists have different political views. They want more radical changes than those prescribed by left realists but stop well short of advocating a total transformation of society. They refer to themselves as criminologists of crime and deviance.
Walker (1997) wrote about important changes in the world economy in responses of governments and in culture. Multinational corporations had shifted activities from country to country simply in search for greater profitability. For example British Telecom has shifted some of its call centres to Asian countries at the expense of unemployment in this country. Then there are other companies like Henry Ford who mass produce their products. Taylor (1998) argued that mass production of products which are standardised is no longer a way that profit can be made, thereby introducing change. These changes have reduced job security of full time staff and increased the amount of part time, temporary and insecure employment.
Taylor (1998) further argues that, the state has reduced social and economic planning, its involvement in the provision of public goods such as housing, welfare, transport and urban planning. Some of these areas have been increasingly opened up to market forces and competition that has led to cut backs in the provision of welfare. The United Kingdom has become a nation that focuses on economic growth and aims to a share of world markets. Ruggiero and South (1995 cited in Taylor 1998) argue that the EU has increasingly become an exclusively economic community that has put its primary emphasis upon economic growth and on trying to gain an increasing share of world markets. This is leaving little or no space for development of social justice. Taylor (1998) does not believe that marketization and the idea of increased consumer consumption and choice completely pervades all European societies but he does believe they’re increasingly influential. Changes, he believes, have had a profound impact on crime.
Sociologists have argued that globalisation and marketisation have resulted in opportunities for criminals. They have also argued that this is due to people wanting to make a lot of money. It can be argued that one of the main reasons for this is due to the restructuring of companies and redundancies. Walker (1997) believes that capitalism resulted on corporate greed and has led to criminal activities within businesses that extend their influence throughout the world. Criminal opportunities such as insider trading have resulted from this. Taylor further argued that, globalisation and marketisation have increased the opportunities for various types of crime based directly upon growth of market, consumer societies, for example insurance fraud by claimants and salespeople. In capitalist societies, (Taylor 1998) identified a fundamental shift in employment patterns in capitalist societies. Both mass manufacturing and public sector employment areas have experienced substantial job losses. Schifferes (2012) argued that there is little prospect of anything like a return to full employment in the UK. It is further argued that Britain could enjoy a three per cent economic growth a year but not produce any jobs for society, thereby increasing poverty. Those with modern and technical skills will be in a position to do better during the economic gloom. Non- skilled workers might find it difficult to get back into work. Those that do find work may get a lower paying job a long way away from home. Through the movement of multi-national corporations, seeking for cheaper labour, Britain has suffered as many redundancies have occurred.
Walker (1997) argued that unemployment has also had an effect on communities and individuals. Some individuals have lost self-respect, whilst some may be unwilling to ask for help from the state due to their social status thereby impacting family life. This shows that not only had globalisation had an impact on companies and economic structure, it has indirectly affected family life as well. Schifferes (2012) further argued that, the lack of opportunity and hope has lead people to turn to crime. Officially recorded burglary increased by 135% between 2009 and 2011.
Ruggiero et al (1992 cited in Taylor 1998) believed that subcontracting has encouraged employment of people who are working illegally, fraudulent benefit claimers and those employed in conditions or wage levels which fail to conform to national laws. This mainly happens in industries where rules can be broken to cut costs in order to get and retain contracts in competitive industries and to maximise their profits.
Conclusively the significance of globalisation for criminology is that it brings light on crime linked to globalisation and the reparations such as, the spread of nuclear weapons capability, international terrorism because of blurring boundaries, religious fundamentalism; changing emphasis from multilateralism to unilateralism the existence of long-term unemployment and under-employment, land and noise pollution, shortage of resources, changing attitudes, mass migration to countries with resources, health, crime and society , global warming are amongst a vast of issues attracting concern. However, over and above everything else globalisation seems to thrive and still stands as a powerful instrument in bringing people and business alike under one roof, the global market.

Reference
Douglas, S. P & Wind, Y (1987). Globalisation. Columbia Journal of World Business, vol 4 p.19-29

Levitt, T. (1983) The Globalization of Markets. Harvard Business Review, vol 9 pg2–102.

Ohmae, K. (1989) Managing in a Borderless World. New York. Sage Publishing

Schifferes S (2012) Globalisation shakes the world Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6279679.stm Last Accessed 15/11/2013

Taylor I (1998) Globalization, criminology and the judicial field. New York. Columbia University Publishing Ltd

Walker (1997) Globalisation and crime in society. 2nd edition. Milton Keynes Palgrave McMillan

Yip, G.S. (2003) Total Global Strategy II: Updated for the Internet and Service Era, 2nd edn. New York. Palgrave McMillan