essay about economic impact of globalization in your life

Effects of Economic Globalization

Globalization has led to increases in standards of living around the world, but not all of its effects are positive for everyone.

Social Studies, Economics, World History

Bangladesh Garment Workers

The garment industry in Bangladesh makes clothes that are then shipped out across the world. It employs as many as four million people, but the average worker earns less in a month than a U.S. worker earns in a day.

Photograph by Mushfiqul Alam

Put simply, globalization is the connection of different parts of the world. In economics, globalization can be defined as the process in which businesses, organizations, and countries begin operating on an international scale. Globalization is most often used in an economic context, but it also affects and is affected by politics and culture. In general, globalization has been shown to increase the standard of living in developing countries, but some analysts warn that globalization can have a negative effect on local or emerging economies and individual workers. A Historical View Globalization is not new. Since the start of civilization, people have traded goods with their neighbors. As cultures advanced, they were able to travel farther afield to trade their own goods for desirable products found elsewhere. The Silk Road, an ancient network of trade routes used between Europe, North Africa, East Africa, Central Asia, South Asia, and the Far East, is an example of early globalization. For more than 1,500 years, Europeans traded glass and manufactured goods for Chinese silk and spices, contributing to a global economy in which both Europe and Asia became accustomed to goods from far away. Following the European exploration of the New World, globalization occurred on a grand scale; the widespread transfer of plants, animals, foods, cultures, and ideas became known as the Columbian Exchange. The Triangular Trade network in which ships carried manufactured goods from Europe to Africa, enslaved Africans to the Americas, and raw materials back to Europe is another example of globalization. The resulting spread of slavery demonstrates that globalization can hurt people just as easily as it can connect people. The rate of globalization has increased in recent years, a result of rapid advancements in communication and transportation. Advances in communication enable businesses to identify opportunities for investment. At the same time, innovations in information technology enable immediate communication and the rapid transfer of financial assets across national borders. Improved fiscal policies within countries and international trade agreements between them also facilitate globalization. Political and economic stability facilitate globalization as well. The relative instability of many African nations is cited by experts as one of the reasons why Africa has not benefited from globalization as much as countries in Asia and Latin America. Benefits of Globalization Globalization provides businesses with a competitive advantage by allowing them to source raw materials where they are inexpensive. Globalization also gives organizations the opportunity to take advantage of lower labor costs in developing countries, while leveraging the technical expertise and experience of more developed economies. With globalization, different parts of a product may be made in different regions of the world. Globalization has long been used by the automotive industry , for instance, where different parts of a car may be manufactured in different countries. Businesses in several different countries may be involved in producing even seemingly simple products such as cotton T-shirts. Globalization affects services, too. Many businesses located in the United States have outsourced their call centers or information technology services to companies in India. As part of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), U.S. automobile companies relocated their operations to Mexico, where labor costs are lower. The result is more jobs in countries where jobs are needed, which can have a positive effect on the national economy and result in a higher standard of living. China is a prime example of a country that has benefited immensely from globalization. Another example is Vietnam, where globalization has contributed to an increase in the prices for rice, lifting many poor rice farmers out of poverty. As the standard of living increased, more children of poor families left work and attended school. Consumers benefit also. In general, globalization decreases the cost of manufacturing . This means that companies can offer goods at a lower price to consumers. The average cost of goods is a key aspect that contributes to increases in the standard of living. Consumers also have access to a wider variety of goods. In some cases, this may contribute to improved health by enabling a more varied and healthier diet; in others, it is blamed for increases in unhealthy food consumption and diabetes. Downsides Not everything about globalization is beneficial. Any change has winners and losers, and the people living in communities that had been dependent on jobs outsourced elsewhere often suffer. Effectively, this means that workers in the developed world must compete with lower-cost markets for jobs; unions and workers may be unable to defend against the threat of corporations that offer the alternative between lower pay or losing jobs to a supplier in a less expensive labor market. The situation is more complex in the developing world, where economies are undergoing rapid change. Indeed, the working conditions of people at some points in the supply chain are deplorable. The garment industry in Bangladesh, for instance, employs an estimated four million people, but the average worker earns less in a month than a U.S. worker earns in a day. In 2013, a textile factory building collapsed, killing more than 1,100 workers. Critics also suggest that employment opportunities for children in poor countries may increase negative impacts of child labor and lure children of poor families away from school. In general, critics blame the pressures of globalization for encouraging an environment that exploits workers in countries that do not offer sufficient protections. Studies also suggest that globalization may contribute to income disparity and inequality between the more educated and less educated members of a society. This means that unskilled workers may be affected by declining wages, which are under constant pressure from globalization. Into the Future Regardless of the downsides, globalization is here to stay. The result is a smaller, more connected world. Socially, globalization has facilitated the exchange of ideas and cultures, contributing to a world view in which people are more open and tolerant of one another.

Articles & Profiles

Media credits.

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Production Managers

Program specialists, last updated.

February 20, 2024

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Geography & Travel
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts

globalization

globalization , integration of the world’s economies, politics, and cultures. German-born American economist Theodore Levitt has been credited with having coined the term globalization in a 1983 article titled “The Globalization of Markets.” The phenomenon is widely considered to have begun in the 19th century following the advent of the Industrial Revolution , but some scholars date it more specifically to about 1870, when exports became a much more significant share of some countries’ gross domestic product (GDP). Its continued escalation is largely attributable to the development of new technologies—particularly in the fields of communication and transportation—and to the adoption of liberal trade policies by countries around the world.

Social scientists have identified the central aspects of globalization as interconnection, intensification, time-space distanciation (conditions that allow time and space to be organized in a manner that connects presence and absence), supraterritoriality, time-space compression, action at a distance, and accelerating interdependence. Modern analysts also conceive of globalization as a long-term process of deterritorialization—that is, of social activities (economic, political, and cultural) occurring without regard for geographic location. Thus, globalization can be defined as the stretching of economic, political, and social relationships in space and time. A manufacturer assembling a product for a distant market , a country submitting to international law , and a language adopting a foreign loanword are all examples of globalization.

Of course history is filled with such occurrences: Chinese artisans once wove silk bound for the Roman Empire ( see Silk Road ); kingdoms in western Europe honoured dictates of the Roman Catholic Church ; and English adopted many Norman French words in the centuries after the Battle of Hastings . These interactions and others laid the groundwork for globalization and are now recognized by historians and economists as important predecessors of the modern phenomenon. Analysts have labeled the 15th to 18th century as a period of “proto-globalization,” when European explorers established maritime trade routes across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and encountered new lands. Integration prior to this time has been characterized as “archaic globalization.”

What distinguishes the process of modern globalization from those forms of global integration that preceded it are its pace and extent. According to some academics, three distinct eras of modern globalization can be identified, each of them marked by points of sudden acceleration in international interaction. Under this scheme, the “first globalization” era refers to the period between approximately 1870 and 1914, during which new transportation and communication technology decreased or eliminated many of the drawbacks to distance. The “second globalization” era is said to have lasted from roughly 1944 to 1971, a period in which an international monetary system based on the value of the U.S. dollar facilitated a new level of trade between capitalist countries. And the “third globalization” era is thought to have begun with the revolutions of 1989–90, which opened the communist Eastern bloc to the flow of capital and coincided with the creation of the World Wide Web . Some scholars argue that a new period of globalization, the “fourth globalization,” is underway, but there is little consensus on when this era began or whether it is truly distinct enough to merit its own designation.

New levels of interconnectedness fostered by globalization are credited for numerous benefits to humanity. The spread of industrial technology and the resulting increase in productivity have contributed to a reduction in the percentage of the world’s population living in poverty. The sharing of medical knowledge has dramatically decreased the incidence of once-feared diseases and even eliminated smallpox. And economic interdependence among countries discourages war between them.

However, the implementation of globalization has been much criticized, leading to the development of the anti-globalization movement. Opponents of globalization—or at least, globalization in its present form ( see neoliberal globalization )—represent a variety of interests on both the political left and right. Labour unions disdain multinational companies’ ability to move their operations to countries with cheaper labour; Indigenous peoples rue the difficulty of maintaining their traditions; and leftists object to the neoliberal character of the new world economy, arguing that the capitalist logic on which they contend globalization is based leads to asymmetrical power relations (both internationally and domestically) and transforms every aspect of life into a commodity. Right-wing critics of globalization believe that it threatens both national economies and national identity. They advocate national control of a country’s economy and rigidly restricted immigration.

Globalization has also produced effects that are more universally worrisome. Expanded transportation networks facilitate not only increased trade but also the spread of diseases. Undesirable trade, such as human trafficking and poaching, has flourished alongside legitimate commerce. Moreover, the pollution generated by the world’s modernization has resulted in global warming and climate change , threatening Earth’s very habitability.

Whether globalization will adapt to these problems remains to be seen, but it is already changing again. For example, globalization began in the 19th century with an explosion in exports, but, even before the COVID-19 pandemic that swept through the world in 2020 resulted in global lockdowns, trade as a share of many countries’ GDP had fallen. It can be argued that the global supply chains today rely more on knowledge than on labour . And services now constitute a larger share of the global economy than goods. A “fourth globalization” might indeed be here—or at least on the way.

Starter Guides

What Is a PEO? Professional Employer Organizations Explained

How to Hire Internationally and Top 5 Mistakes to Avoid

How to Expand Internationally and Take your Company Global

Asia Pacific

New Zealand

Philippines

South Korea

Switzerland

United Kingdom

Middle East

Saudi Arabia

North America

• International Expansion
• Recruitment

How Globalization Has Changed Our Lives: Benefits and Challenges

The world as we know it was born only 3 decades ago. Not even the boldest minds in “futurology” would have imagined the speed, reach and breakthroughs that technology has created since computers became 70% of our life. In addition, never in the story of humanity has globalization impacted almost every person on the planet.

These changes are happening at great speed. Being aware, and most importantly, being prepared for these changes, is crucial for businesses and individuals. As you read these paragraphs you will realize that the world around you is changing on a daily basis, and, that it is very hard to keep up.

Benefits of Globalization

Benefits of globalization are too many to summarize in this article. We have selected the most important and relevant.

Communication

Undoubtedly, communication has to be on the top of our list. The Internet of Things (IoT) has changed every single task of our lives. From grocery shopping to commercial transactions and everything in between. Being able to establish live videoconferences 13000 miles away from one another, has made traveling and face to face meetings, a thing of the past.

Some parts of our daily lives such as banking, customer service, and even education, are provided through the internet making our life somewhat easier.

Access to Markets and Information

A businessperson, or entrepreneur, might have an idea that will dramatically change lives or have success one ocean away. The same principle applies to investment, crowdfunding, think tanking, and ecommerce.  

Although transportation has not changed in 60 years, prices, times and logistics have. Selling products to the entire world is now available at lower costs. Being visible to worldwide potential customers or contacts makes that every company can go global by investing enough time and money on their website.

Remote Work

People who work part-time or full-time from their homes have increased dramatically over the past decade. For instance, work-from-home employees can now work collaboratively using an online  video editor  or  audio joiner . Companies can now also use AI-driven tools such as an  AI avatar  to assist them in documentation and presentations. This tendency will grow exponentially over the following years. This means lower expenses for both employer and employee, little to no physical office space, and no utility bills.

This also means no weekly schedules, less domestic taxes and labor obligations, and of course multilingual and multicultural staff. In exchange, workers have time to spend with their families, as the 9 to 5 job is being replaced with tasks and projects. Most importantly, working remotely has opened new opportunities to many around the globe.

Living Standards and Economic Power

Several International organizations agree to say that the number of people below the poverty lines is decreasing. Countries are growing in financial terms. In addition, regions such as Latin America and Southern Asia are blooming. This provides numerous opportunities for products, services, and investments in every industry.  

These phenomena have also provided the opportunity to live abroad for many people, who can experience similar conditions in more countries than some decades ago. The improvement of these conditions has also changed the levels of safety, reducing homicides and burglaries on dozens of countries.

Challenges of Globalization

The new questions to be answered in the following years address primarily to the following aspects:

Job Displacement  

As seen every day, the technological revolution has brought many problems to the current labor market in terms of industry migration.  

Wages greatly differ from country to country. A monthly minimum wage in the United States is about 6 months of the minimum wage in Bolivia, to name an example. Both workers are able to perform the same tasks, so companies, as it seems obvious, decide to move the plant to a country were staffing costs are less.  

This increases the unemployment rates in the country, and, as it is a global tendency, there are fewer jobs in that same area.  

Job Disappearance  

Dozens of trusted authors declare that there are dozens of positions which are now filled entirely or partially by machines. The automotive industry, customer service, among others, need fewer workers every day. As this is a global phenomenon, computer devices and robots are less expensive and will take over thousands of positions in the near future.  

Both workers and governments need to face this problem immediately. Education, training and job placement can greatly affect the current scenario.

Uncontrolled Information

Information and the fact that it can be so easily manipulated is a great danger of our current reality. Most people rely on the information found online and this has caused numerous problems worldwide. From fake news to self-medication, people trust the internet to be the source of TRUE and ACCURATE information on almost anything.  

In addition, as social media is part of our lives, rumors and fake news can be widely spread causing massive evacuations or changing the way we live. Also, as it provides an anonymous veil for its users, allows people to freely insult, mistreat or bully almost without consequences.  

Loss of Customs and Traditions

As there is now a sense of a global culture, this culture often forgets about the richness of domestic traditions. Music, to name an example, has been globalized to the point that a hit song is on top of the hit list in over one hundred countries. As this is not a problem, it does bring a question on the domestic musicians and rhythms.

On another example, National clothing industries have been suffering from this trend, as people rather consume foreign fashion and products instead of domestic brands.

  As the difference between cultures is what brings us together as humans, vocabulary, accent, food, and music shall be protected at all costs. Maintaining authenticity as members of a country, community or sharing the same taste in music is fundamental to remember who we are. Patriotism and national values are also lost every single day.

Making the best of the amazing times we live in, is fundamental to improve our lives. By using the tools provided in terms of freedom of speech, online education, and market access, everyone can change, evolve and improve, while preserving the values that make them humans.

A globalized world, without frontiers in terms of culture, products, and training, is now a reality. Using these tools to your benefit depends entirely on you.  

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 4.8 / 5. Vote count: 218

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

The world as we know it was born only 3 decades ago. Not even the

What does PEO Stand For? A PEO is a professional employer organization. This organization provides

Find the Best PEO

Get in Touch

Popular posts.

The 4 Best Germany PEOs & Employers of Record (EOR)

Privacy policy

© 2022 GlobalizationPedia. All rights reserved.

Advertisement

The impact of economic, social, and political globalization and democracy on life expectancy in low-income countries: are sustainable development goals contradictory?

• Published: 18 January 2021
• Volume 23 , pages 13508–13525, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Arif Eser Guzel   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5072-9527 1 ,
• Unal Arslan 1 &
• Ali Acaravci 1  

111k Accesses

46 Citations

10 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals announced by the United Nations are important guides for the development processes of developing countries. However, achieving all of these goals is only possible if the goals are consistent with each other. It has been observed in the literature that possible contradictions between these goals are ignored. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to investigate whether two sustainable development goals (SDGs) of the UN are contradictory or supporting each other in low-income countries. These SDGs are “Good Health and Well-Being” (SDG3) and “Partnerships for the Goals” (SDG17). For this purpose, the role of globalization and democracy in life expectancy is empirically investigated in 16 low-income countries over the period 1970–2017. While globalization has been used as an indicator of the partnership between countries, democracy has been used as an indicator of accountability and cooperation between governments and societies. According to estimations of the continuous-updated fully modified (CUP-FM) and bias-adjusted ordinary least squares (BA-OLS), globalization and its subcomponents such as economic, social, and political globalization affect life expectancy positively. Democracy also increases life expectancy in those countries. The GDP per capita is also used as a control variable. Our results show that a higher level of per capita income is positively associated with higher levels of life expectancy. In conclusion, no contradiction was found between SDG3 and SDG17 in those countries. Achieving a healthier society requires economic, social, and political integration between governments and societies.

Similar content being viewed by others

The Human Development Index as the Key Indicator for Measuring the Quality of Life of the Population in Altai Krai

Comparing Life Expectancy Determinants Between Indonesia and Oman from 1980 to 2020

Human Development Index

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

The main problem of economics is to increase economic development and social welfare. Increasing the social welfare level is a complex process that depends on economic and non-economic factors. Achieving economic development or increasing the level of welfare depends on achieving and sustaining the main objectives in political, economic, and social areas. Today, development is no longer a process that can be realized through policies implemented by governments alone. It requires cooperation between governments and societies. While cooperation between different countries requires globalization in the economic, social, and political fields, democracy is the way to ensure cooperation between governments and societies.

Health is one of the most important indicators of social welfare. Besides being one of the indicators of development, it is one of the determinants of human capital formation which is necessary for economic development. Individuals living in developed countries live a healthier life compared to those living in less developed countries. While the differences between the levels of development of countries determine the health conditions, at the same time, improvement of public health paves the way for economic development. Healthy people have higher opportunities to earn a higher income than unhealthy people. Individuals with higher incomes can benefit from better nutrition and access to health services. Therefore, economic development and improvement of health conditions represent a two-way process. In this context, the determination of the variables that will enable the achievement of the goal of a healthier society is especially important in explaining the economic differences between developing countries and developed countries. Because of its importance, health-related goals have an important place both among the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) announced by the United Nations.

The world leaders with the support of international funding organizations announced the Millennium Declaration in September 2000 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. They committed their nations to a new international partnership to achieve some development targets having with the final deadline of 2015. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) consist of 8 goals, 21 targets, and 60 related indicators covering a wide spectrum of development areas such as “End Poverty and Hunger (MDG 1),” “Universal Education (MDG 2),” “Gender Equality (MDG 3),” “Child Health (MDG 4),” “Maternal Health (MDG 5),” “Combat HIV/AIDS (MDG 6),” “Environmental Sustainability (MDG 7),” and “Global Partnership (MDG 8).” As we see, three of the goals are directly associated with the health status of the people. In the deadline of 2015, according to “Health in 2015: From MDGs to SDGs” report of the World Health Organization (WHO), there are improvements in health-related targets such as child health, maternal health, and combat with HIV/AIDS. Globally, HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria targets have been met. Also, the child mortality rate was reduced by 53% and maternal mortality by 43% (WHO 2016 ). On a global view, although health-related problems are largely resolved, the situation is not as good for low-income countries. As shown in Fig.  1 , significant differences exist between developing countries and developed countries in achieving health-related goals.

Source Halisçelik and Soytas (2015)

World Bank Income Groups’ MDGs Index Values in 2015.

According to MDGs, indexes in the context of health status show that the goals desired in terms of health are not attained in low-income countries compared to other income groups. After the deadline of MDGs, the United Nations has announced 17 SDGs, and “Good Health and Well-Being” takes its place as the third goal. Since achieving these goals requires the cooperation of countries and societies, “Partnership for the Goals” is determined as the seventeenth SDG. According to the United Nations ( 2019 ), the main indicators of global partnerships are trade, foreign direct investments, remittances, financial integration technology transfers, data monitoring and accountability, internet usage, and political integration among countries. In our study, while globalization is used as a proxy indicator of global cooperation, democracy is an indicator of cooperation between societies and governments. Democracy also refers to accountability levels of governments.

Globalization can simply be defined as the process of international integration which has economic, social, and political dimensions (Dreher 2006 ). Many countries have adapted to this process and have enjoyed the welfare effects of globalization by implementing necessary economic and institutional transformation. However, some countries still suffer from poor adaption to global markets. According to the KOF Globalization Index published by the Swiss Economic Institute ( 2020 ), low-income countries have the lowest globalization level compared to other income groups. They also suffer from bad health conditions such as low life expectancy, communicable diseases, and high mortality rates according to MDG indexes given above. At this point, the literature is divided into two parts. The first one blames globalization and argues that poverty and as a result of this, low life expectancy derives from the inequality created by globalization itself (Buss 2002 ). The second group mostly focuses on the benefits of free trade, capital mobility, and technology transfers (Rao and Vadlamannati 2011 ). The low-income countries also suffer from low institutional quality in the context of democracy and political rights. According to Freedom House’s list of electoral democracies, the countries without electoral democracy are mostly the low-income countries in the Middle East, North Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia (Freedom House 2019 ).

The main question of our study is to determine whether the problem of low life expectancy in low-income countries is due to the low levels of globalization and weak political institutions in these countries. To answer this question, the role of economic, social, and political globalization and democracy in life expectancy in those countries is empirically investigated. This study provides several contributions to previous literature. First, we provide a new perspective in the context of sustainable development goals. Previous studies mostly focused on how to achieve SDGs, while possible conflicts between the goals were mostly ignored especially in the context of health. Such conflicts between sustainable development goals in the literature have mostly focused on the impact of economic growth and globalization on the sustainable environment (Ulucak and Bilgili 2018 ; Zafar et al. 2019a ). Those studies are mostly addressed the relationship between SDG7, SDG8, SDG13, and SDG17 (Zafar et al. 2019b ). To the best of our knowledge, it is the first study that investigates the relationship between SDG3 and SDG17. It is also important to examine this relationship in low-income countries since they still suffer from low levels of life expectancy, less adaptation to globalization, and poor democratic institutions compared to other income groups. Previous works mostly provide global evidence, while only a few studies focus on less developed countries. Achieving these 17 goals put forward by the United Nations at the same time is possible only if these goals do not conflict with each other. Second, empirical works in previous literature consist of traditional estimation methods called first-generation tests. In the analysis of panel data, the estimators considering cross-sectional dependence are called the second-generation estimators. Cross-sectional dependency simply refers to the situation when the shock that occurs in one country affects other countries as well. The source of this problem encountered in panel data analysis is the economic, financial, and political integration among countries (Menyah et al. 2014 ). The ignorance of cross-sectional dependence results in biased and inconsistent estimates and wrong inferences (De Hoyos and Sarafidis 2006 ; Chudik and Pesaran 2013 ). Low-income countries are mostly African countries where there is a rising trend in terms of integration to global markets and institutions (Beck et al. 2011 ). Using estimation techniques that consider cross-sectional dependence in those countries prevents misleading results. As the literature is divided into two parts about the effects of globalization on human well-being, fresh evidence via robust estimation methods is required in order to provide proper policy implications. To fill this gap, our work provides second-generation estimations.

2 Literature review

To improve the health conditions of a country, the welfare of the poor should be improved as well. Poverty is detrimental to access to health services. Therefore, the positive impact of globalization on health first emerged with its positive effects on economic growth (Labonté et al. 2009 : 10). The effects of globalization on growth were mostly driven by free trade, international specialization, technology transfers, knowledge spillovers, and competitive markets. It also offers broader opportunities for entrepreneurs and paves the way for innovation (Grossman and Helpman 2015 : 101). As expected, poverty rates significantly reduced in the last two decades because of the integration of developing economies to global markets (Harrison 2006 ). When trade liberalization and income increases are considered together, people's access to treatments and medications can be easier and life expectancy may be prolonged. However, we should consider other possibilities in the context of spreading communicable diseases. As Deaton ( 2004 ) mentioned before, access to cheap and easy travel can increase the rate of spread of communicable diseases. Migration is also another fact to take into account. Particularly rising sexual tourism and migrant sex workers increase the spread of sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV/AIDS. But today there are improved treatment methods to solve these problems. Even HIV-infected people can survive with antiretroviral therapy, and it also reduces sexual transmission of the infection (Dollar 2001 ; Cohen et al. 2011 ). Due to the high cost of advanced drugs as in the case of antiretroviral therapy, it should be accepted that people in low-income countries will have trouble accessing the drugs (Buss 2002 ). There are approaches known as the unequal exchange that globalization increases inequality among countries and that developed countries are more profitable from the globalization process (Love, 1980 ). It may also increase domestic income inequality. There are a few studies that came with the conclusion that globalization rises inequality (Dreher and Gaston 2008 ; Ha 2012 ), but Bergh and Nilsson ( 2010 ) suggested a different perspective. Due to extensive R&D investments and scientific activities, developed countries can find new treatment methods and supply advanced drugs. The only way to access that knowledge and these drugs are trade and integration between developed and underdeveloped countries. Globalization can play an important role in improving the health conditions of low-income countries to the extent that it can provide these linkages. One should also notice that wider markets and higher returns are important factors that motivate entrepreneurs. Buss ( 2002 ) claimed that the intellectual property rights of advanced drugs belong to private firms in developed countries, and because of the strong protection of property rights, less developed countries have trouble accessing them. However, rising global human rights became an important step to advance public health issues against economic concerns in the trade of pharmaceutical products.

The human rights approach focuses on how globalization affected disadvantaged people worldwide (Chapman 2009 ). It is an important instrument in the suppression of the inequality created by economic globalization. Because of the pressure on the government about human rights, disadvantaged people are becoming able to meet their basic human needs. The role of political globalization on this point is forcing governments to adopt global institutions. It increases the number of international organizations in which a country is a member. This makes governments more accountable in the global area and forcing them to pay attention to protect human rights. Gelleny and McCoy ( 2001 ) also claimed that integration among countries leads to political stability. Therefore, governments' tendency to violate human rights in order to maintain their power becomes lesser. Moreover, as social dimensions of globalization expand and communication opportunities among people in different countries increase, the possibility of human rights violations being discovered by other people increases (Dreher et al. 2012 ). Governments that know the international sanctions required by these violations have to be more cautious against human rights violations. Social globalization also provides cultural integration among the world’s people, and it changes lifestyles and consumption patterns worldwide. The consequences of this change can have positive and negative effects. First, increased urban population and sedentary lifestyles may enhance prepared food consumption and reduce daily movements which result in rising obesity and diabetes (Hu 2011 ). Second, although rapidly increasing consumption options and diversity are known as welfare indicators, they also can cause stress which is known as an important determinant of many diseases both psychological and physical (Cutler et al. 2006 ). Third, due to knowledge spillovers and communication technology, people can learn about healthy nutrition and protection from communicable diseases. Thus, unhealthy but traditional consumption patterns and lifestyles may change. These days we experience the coronavirus epidemic and we see once again the importance of globalization. Countries are aware of infectious diseases in different parts of the world in a very short time and can take measures to stop the spread of the virus. The changes created by social and political globalization play a major role in this emergence. Social globalization enables people in very remote areas of the world to communicate with each other, while political globalization forces governments to be transparent about infectious diseases.

With economic globalization, increased economic activity may lead to urbanization. One may think about unhealthy conditions of an urban area such as environmental degradation, air and water pollution, higher crime rates, and stress which reduce life expectancy. However, according to Kabir ( 2008 ), people living in an urban area can benefit from improved medical care, easy access to pharmacy, and to the hospitals that use higher technology. They can also get a better education and can enjoy better socioeconomic conditions.

Democracy can be considered as another determinant of life expectancy. In order to solve the health problems of the poor, people should draw the attention of the government. Sen ( 1999 ) claimed that the instrumental role of democracy in solving problems is enabling people to express and support their claims. Thus, the attention of politicians can be attracted to the problems of the poor. Politicians who have never tasted poverty do not have the urge to take action against the problems of the poor at the right time. Another linkage can be established through accountability (Besley and Kudamatsu 2006 ). In democracies, governments have an obligation to account to citizens for what purposes the resources were used. Thus, resources can be allocated to solve important public issues such as quality of life, communicable diseases, and mortality.

Compared to theoretical discussions, previous literature provides a lack of empirical evidence. Barlow and Vissandjee ( 1999 ) examined the determinants of life expectancy with cross-sectional data available in 1990 for 77 developed and developing countries. According to regression results, per capita income, literacy rate, and lower fertility are important determinants of life expectancy while living in a tropical area decreasing it. Another finding in this study shows that health expenditures in those countries failed to increase life expectancy. Following this study, Or ( 2000 ) analyzed the determinants of health outcomes in 21 industrialized OECD countries covering the period 1970–1992. This study presents gender-specific estimates separately for men and women. Fixed effects estimation results reveal a significant negative relationship between public health expenditure and women's premature death. The relationship also occurs for men, while GDP per capita dropped from the regression model due to high collinearity. Furthermore, GDP per capita and the proportion of white-collar workers reduce premature death for both men and women, while alcohol consumption increases it.

Franco et al. ( 2004 ) analyzed the impact of democracy on health utilizing political rights data of 170 countries. Empirical results show that people living in democracies enjoy better health conditions such as longer life expectancy, better maternal health, and lower child mortality. Following this, Besley and Kudamatsu ( 2006 ) investigated the nexus between democracy and health outcomes utilizing panel data from the 1960s to the 2000s. In their study, they used life expectancy at birth and child mortality variables for 146 countries as indicators of health outcomes. According to results, democracy has a positive and significant effect on life expectancy at birth and it also reduces child mortality. Safaei ( 2006 ) also investigated the impact of democracy on life expectancy and adult and child mortality rates with the data of 32 autocratic, 13 incoherent, and 72 democratic countries. According to the OLS estimation results, improving democratic institutions increases life expectancy and reduces child and adult mortality rates. Another finding of the study is that socioeconomic factors such as income, education, and access to health care services are important determinants of health status.

Owen and Wu ( 2007 ) found a positive relationship between trade openness and health outcomes using a panel of 219 countries. Health outcome measures of this study are infant mortality and life expectancy. Trade openness is one of the most important dimensions of globalization.

Kabir ( 2008 ) analyzed the determinants of life expectancy in 91 developing countries. Empirical results obtained are the opposite of the expected. According to results, per capita income, literacy rate, per capita health expenditure, and urbanization have no significant impact on life expectancy. On the other hand, the number of physicians has a positive and significant impact on life expectancy, while malnutrition reduces it. As a dummy variable, living in Sub-Saharan Africa is another factor that reduces life expectancy due to communicable diseases like HIV, malaria, etc.

Bergh and Nilsson ( 2010 ) used a panel of 92 countries in the period 1970–2005 to investigate the relationship between globalization and life expectancy. They used social, political, and economic globalization data separately, and the results show a significant positive effect of economic globalization on life expectancy at birth. But no significant relationship was found between social globalization, political globalization, and life expectancy. They also used average years of education, urban population, the number of physicians, and nutrition as control variables and the effect of economic globalization was still positive and significant.

Welander et al. ( 2015 ) examined the effects of globalization and democracy on child health in their panel data analysis for 70 developing countries covering the period 1970–2009. According to the results, globalization significantly reduces child mortality. In addition, democracy improves child health and it also increases the beneficial effects of globalization on child health. Following this study, Tausch ( 2015 ) analyzed the role of globalization in life expectancy in 99 countries. The results of OLS estimates show that globalization leads to inequality, and therefore, it reduces health performance in terms of life expectancy and infant mortality. These results are contradictory to positive views on the role of globalization in public health. However, in 19 of 99 countries, globalization increases public health performance. Ali and Audi ( 2016 ) also analyzed the role of globalization in life expectancy in Pakistan. According to ARDL estimation results, life expectancy is positively associated with higher levels of globalization. Another study on the Pakistan case proposed by Alam et al. ( 2016 ) concluded that foreign direct investment and trade openness which are important indicators of economic globalization affects life expectancy positively.

Patterson and Veenstra ( 2016 ) concluded that electoral democracies provide better health conditions compared to other countries. Their analysis includes annual data from 168 countries covering the period 1960–2010. Empirical results show democracy has a significant positive impact on life expectancy and it reduces infant mortality.

In their recent study, Shahbaz et al. ( 2019 ) investigated the impact of globalization, financial development, and economic growth on life expectancy. The authors used nonlinear time series analysis methods utilizing the data of 16 Sub-Saharan African countries over the period 1970–2012. Their results show that globalization, financial development, and economic growth affect life expectancy positively in 14 of 16 Sub-Saharan African countries.

The previous literature provides a lack of evidence in the context of globalization, democracy, and life expectancy relationship. There are also methodological weaknesses in previous empirical studies. First, it can be observed that previous studies are mostly based on traditional estimation methods. Second, the panel data analyses are based on the first-generation estimators that assume cross-sectional independence. This assumption is hard to satisfy due to integration among countries. In addition, ignoring the cross-sectional dependence results in inconsistent estimations. Particularly in empirical work in the context of globalization which refers to economic, political, and cultural integration among countries, considering the cross-sectional dependence becomes more important. Therefore, in order to make a methodological contribution to previous literature, we used second-generation panel time series methods considering cross-sectional dependence.

3 Methodology and data

According to the United Nations, achieving sustainable development goals requires global cooperation and partnership. Therefore, “partnerships for goals” has taken its place as the 17th sustainable development target. However, it was emphasized that some sub-goals should be realized in order to reach this goal. These include improving international resource mobility, helping developing countries to attain debt sustainability, promoting the transfer of information and technology between developed and developing countries, an open and rule-based free trade system, encouraging public–private and civil society partnerships, increasing transparency and accountability, and high quality and reliable data (United Nations 2019 ). In our empirical work, economic, social, and political globalization and democracy variables were used as proxies of the subcomponents of SDG17. In addition, the life expectancy at birth variable that mostly used in related literature as a proxy of health status and well-being, it is used in our study as a proxy of SDG3. In this study, we investigated the role of globalization and democracy in life expectancy in 16 low-income countries. Footnote 1 Following Barlow and Vissandjee ( 1999 ) and ( 2000 ), GDP per capita is used as a control variable in order to mitigate omitted variable bias. Our dataset is covering the period 1970–2017. Following the related literature, we present our model as follows:

where lex is life expectancy at birth which refers to the average number of years a newborn is expected to live. Life expectancy at birth data is provided by World Bank ( 2019 ) World Development Indicators. Life expectancy at birth indicates the number of years a newborn infant would live if prevailing patterns of mortality at the time of its birth were to stay the same throughout its life. The dataset is consisting of a weighted average of collected data from several co-founders. In Eq.  1 , X refers to the KOF Globalization Index developed by Dreher ( 2006 ). This index has been used in previous literature as a proxy of SDG17 (Saint Akadiri et al. 2020 ). The current version of the data published by the Swiss Economic Institute is revised by Gygli et al. ( 2019 ). The globalization variables are between 0–100, and 100 refers to the highest globalization level. In our analysis, we used subcomponents of globalization index such as economic (EC), social (SOS), and political (POL) globalization in addition to overall globalization (GLB). Due to high collinearity, the effects of different types of globalization are analyzed separately. Models 1, 2, 3, and 4 represent the estimations with overall, economic, social, and political globalization indexes, respectively. The democracy variable ( dem ) is provided from the Polity IV project dataset (Marshall and Jaggers 2002 ). While the increases in this indicator represent a more democratic regime, the decreases represent a more autocratic regime. Finally, gdp is real GDP per capita (constant 2010 $) and it is provided from World Bank World Development Indicators. All variables transformed to the logarithmic form except democracy due to negative values. In the estimation of the model, the panel data analysis methods are used.

3.1 Cross-sectional dependence

Traditional panel data methods are based on the assumption that no cross-sectional dependence exists among cross section units. However, this assumption is hard to satisfy due to rising economic, social, and political integration between countries. The estimations do not take this process into account may cause inconsistent results. Such results may also lead to incorrect inferences (Chudik and Pesaran, 2013 ). The existence of cross-sectional dependence in variables and the error term is obtained from the model analyzed with Pesaran ( 2004 ) \({\text{CD}}_{{{\text{LM}}}}\) and Pesaran et al. ( 2008 ) bias-adjusted LM test. These techniques are robust whether N > T and T > N. Therefore, \({CD}_{LM}\) and bias-adjusted LM ( \({LM}_{adj})\) tests are found to be appropriate and their test statistics can be calculated as follows:

Equation  2 shows the calculation of Pesaran ( 2004 ) \({CD}_{LM},\) and Eq.  3 is Pesaran et al. ( 2008 ) bias-adjusted LM test statistic. \({V}_{Tij}\) , \({\mu }_{Tij}\) , and \({\widehat{\rho }}_{ij},\) respectively, represent variance, mean, and the correlation between cross section units. The null and alternative hypothesis for both test statistics; \({H}_{0}\) : No cross-sectional dependence exist; \({H}_{1}\) : Cross-sectional dependence exist.

In the selection of stationarity tests and long-run estimators, the existence of cross-sectional dependence will be decisive. If the null of no cross-sectional dependence is rejected, second-generation methods that assume cross-sectional dependence should be used in order to provide unbiased and consistent estimation results.

3.2 Slope homogeneity

Pesaran and Yamagata ( 2008 ) proposed a method to examine slope heterogeneity in panel data analysis based on the Swamy ( 1970 )’s random coefficient model.

The calculation of the test statistic of Swamy’s model is given in Eq.  4 .

In Eq.  4 , \({\stackrel{\sim }{\beta }}_{i}\) and \({\overbrace{\beta }}_{WFE},\) respectively, indicate the parameters obtained from pooled OLS and weighted fixed effects estimation, while \({M}_{T}\) is the identity matrix. The test statistic obtained from Swamy’s model is improved by Pesaran et al. ( 2008 ) as follows:

where \(\stackrel{\sim }{S}\) is the Swamy test statistic and k is a number of explanatory variables. \({\stackrel{\sim }{\Delta }}_{adj}\) is a bias-adjusted version of \(\stackrel{\sim }{\Delta }\) . \({\stackrel{\sim }{Z}}_{it}\) =k and \(Var\left({\stackrel{\sim }{Z}}_{it}\right)=2k(T-k-1)/T+1\) . The null and alternative hypothesis for both test statistics is given below.

The rejection of the null hypothesis shows that slope coefficients of Eq. 1 are heterogeneous. In the selection of panel data estimation methods, the results of those preliminary analysis are taken into account.

3.3 Unit root test

Pesaran ( 2006 ) suggested a factor modeling approach to solve the cross-sectional dependency problem. This approach is simply based on adding cross-sectional averages to the models as proxies of unobserved common factors. The Cross-sectionally Augmented Dickey–Fuller (CADF) unit root test developed by Pesaran ( 2007 ) is based on that factor modelling approach. This method is an augmented form of Augmented Dickey–Fuller (ADF) regression with lagged cross-sectional average and its first difference to deal with cross-sectional dependence (Baltagi, 2008 : 249). This method considers the cross-sectional dependence and can be used, while N > T and T > N. The CADF regression is:

\({\stackrel{-}{y}}_{t}\) is the average of all N observations. To prevent serial correlation, the regression must be augmented with lagged first differences of both \({y}_{it}\) and \({\stackrel{-}{y}}_{t}\) as follows:

After the calculation of CADF statistics for each cross section ( \({CADF}_{i}\) ), Pesaran ( 2007 ) calculates the CIPS statistic as average of CADF statistics.

If the calculated CIPS statistic exceeds the critical value, it means that the unit root hypothesis is rejected. After the preliminary analysis of unit root, the existence of a long-run relationship between the variables in our model will be investigated via Westerlund and Edgerton ( 2007 ) cointegration test. After this, the long-run coefficients will be estimated using the continuous-updated fully modified (CUP-FM) estimator developed by Bai and Kao ( 2006 ) and Bias-adjusted OLS estimator developed by Westerlund ( 2007 ).

3.4 Cointegration test and long-run relationship

In this study, the cointegration relationship was investigated by Westerlund and Edgerton ( 2007 ) LM bootstrap test. This method considers cross-sectional dependence and provides robust results in small samples (Westerlund and Edgerton, 2007 ). This method is based on the following equation

where \({n}_{ij}\) is an independent and identically distributed process with zero mean and var( \({n}_{ij})\) = \({{\sigma }_{i}}^{2}\) . Westerlund and Edgerton ( 2007 ) suggested following LM test in order to test the null of cointegration

where \({S}_{it}\) is partial sum process of the fully modified estimate of \({z}_{it}\) and \({\widehat{w}}_{i}^{-2}\) is the estimated long-run variance of \({u}_{it}\) conditional on \(\Delta {x}_{it}^{^{\prime}}\) . If the calculated LM statistic is below the critical value, the null of cointegration will be accepted. The critical values will be provided using the bootstrap method in order to prevent cross-sectional dependence.

In the estimation of long-run coefficients, the CUP-FM estimator was used and this method is based on the following regression

where \({\widehat{\lambda }}_{i}^{^{\prime}}\) refers to the estimated factor loadings and \(\hat{y}_{{i,t}}^{ + } = y_{{i,t}} - \left( {\lambda _{i} ^{\prime } \hat{\Omega }_{{F \in i}} + \hat{\Omega }_{{\mu \in i}} } \right)\hat{\Omega }_{{ \in i}}^{{ - 1}} {{\Delta }}x_{{i,t}}\) indicates the transformation of the dependent variable for endogeneity correction. According to Bai and Kao ( 2006 ), CUP-FM estimator is robust under cross-sectional dependence. However, the assumption that the number of common factors (k) is known cannot be satisfied in practice (Westerlund, 2007 ). Therefore, Westerlund ( 2007 ) suggested a bias-adjusted estimator (BA-OLS) following the methodology of Bai and Kao ( 2006 ) except in the context of determining the number of common factors. The author suggested the estimation of k using an information criterion as

where \(IC\left(k\right)\) is the information criterion. In this study, we determined the number of common factors via the Bayesian information criterion (BIC) as follows.

In the equation above, V(k) is the estimated variance of \({\widehat{u}}_{it}\) based on k factors. By minimizing the BIC, we obtain \(\widehat{k}\) . Westerlund ( 2007 ) showed that the estimation of k provides better results compared to CUP-FM estimator assuming k is known. Both of the estimators require cointegrated variables in the long run.

3.5 Empirical results and discussion

The results of Pesaran ( 2004 ) \({CD}_{LM}\) and Pesaran et al. ( 2008 ) bias-adjusted LM tests are given in Table 1 .

The results given in Table 1 show that the null of no cross-sectional dependence is rejected at 1% according to both \({CD}_{LM}\) and \({LM}_{adj}\) test statistics in all variables. In addition, in the error terms obtained from models 1, 2, 3, and 4 the null of no cross-sectional dependence is rejected at 1%. These results show that the methods to be used in the analysis of the stationarity of the variables and the determination of the long-run relationship should consider the cross-sectional dependence.

The results of homogeneity tests developed by Pesaran and Yamagata ( 2008 ) are given in Table 2 . According to the results, the null of homogeneity is accepted at %1 in all models. Therefore, estimators assume parameter homogeneity are used in our analysis.

After the preliminary analysis of cross-sectional dependence, the CADF unit root test developed by Pesaran ( 2007 ) is found to be appropriate for our model because of its robustness under cross-sectional dependence. The results of the CADF unit root test are given in Table 3 .

In the analysis of unit root, constant and trend terms are both considered at level, while only constant term is added at first difference. Maximum lag level is determined as 3, while optimum lag level is determined by F joint test from general to particular. According to results, the null of unit root is accepted for all variables, while calculated CIPS statistics of first-differenced variables exceed 1% critical value. All variables have a unit root, and their first differences are stationary ( \({I}_{1})\) . Therefore, in order to determine the existence of a long-run relationship, we applied Westerlund and Edgerton ( 2007 ) panel cointegration test. This method considers cross-sectional dependence and can be used, while the series are integrated in the same order. The results are shown in Table 4 .

Constant and trend are both considered in the analysis of cointegration, and critical values are obtained from 5000 bootstrap replications. The results show that the null of cointegration is accepted for all models. There is a long-run relationship between life expectancy, globalization, democracy, and GDP per capita. After determining the cointegration relationship, we estimated long-run coefficients utilizing CUP-FM and BA-OLS estimators proposed by Bai and Kao ( 2006 ) and Westerlund ( 2007 ), respectively.

The long-run estimation results given in Table 5 show that overall, economic, social, and political globalization are positively associated with life expectancy at 1% significance level according to both CUP-FM and BA-OLS estimators. The results show that a 1% increase in globalization index increases life expectancy %0.014 and %0.015 according to CUP-FM and BA-OLS estimators, respectively. The impact of economic, social and political globalization indexes is 0.013%, 0.011%, and 0.015% according to CUP-FM estimation results while 0.014%, 0.012%, and 0.017% according to both estimators, respectively.

Our results confirms the findings of Owen and Wu ( 2007 ), Ali and Audi ( 2016 ), and Shahbaz et al. ( 2019 ) who found a positive relationship between globalization and life expectancy. Our empirical work also supports the evidence of Bergh and Nilsson ( 2010 ) in terms of positive effect of economic globalization on life expectancy. While the authors found no significant impact of social and political globalization on life expectancy, our results show that life expectancy is positively associated with both social and political globalization. The results we found contradict Tausch ( 2015 )’s evidences in 80 of 99 countries. However, according to his results, in 19 of 99 countries, globalization affects health positively. When these countries are examined, it is seen that 14 of them are countries in the low and lower-middle income groups. In this sense, it can be said that the evidence we found for low-income countries is in line with the author's evidence. As Dreher ( 2006 ) mentioned, despite its possible inequality effects, the net effect of globalization on development is mostly positive and our empirical work supports that idea. The effect of democracy on life expectancy is also positive and significant at 1% which confirms the findings of Franco et al. ( 2004 ) and Besley and Kudamatsu ( 2006 ). In electoral democracies, people living in poverty and suffering from health problems can easily attract the attention of policymakers compared to autocracies. This leads to the reallocation of resources to solve the primary problems of the society. In the context of sustainable development goals, our results show that there is no conflict between SDG3 (good health and well-being) and SDG17 (partnerships for the goals). The improvement of the health conditions of the poor countries depends on global partnership and economic, social, and political integration among countries. In addition, democracy is an important tool in achieving the goal of a healthy society, as it fosters accountability, transparency, and partnership between governments and the societies they rule. As stated in the introduction section, low-income countries show low performance in terms of health-related sustainable development goals, and their connections with global markets are weak compared to other countries. At the same time, democratic institutions are not developed. Our work supports the idea that in order to achieve SDG3, global partnership and democracy are required.

The GDP per capita that used as a control variable has a positive impact on life expectancy at a 1% level. These results support the evidence of Barlow and Vissandjee ( 1999 ), Or ( 2000 ), and Shahbaz et al. ( 2019 ). Individuals living in countries with high per capita income are expected to have higher welfare and have a longer life expectancy (Judge, 1995 ). In low-income countries where people still suffer from having difficulty in meeting basic human needs, increasing per capita income may lead to better nutritional status, easier access to advanced treatment methods and technology.

4 Conclusion

In this study, the effects of globalization and democracy on life expectancy are empirically investigated in low-income countries. While globalization and democracy indexes are used as proxy indicators of “Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17),” life expectancy used a proxy of “Good Health and Well-Being (SDG 3).” With this, it is aimed to examine the existence of contradiction between those SDGs. In the estimation of the long-run relationship between the variables, second-generation panel data analysis methods that consider cross-sectional dependency are used. According to the results, the globalization index and its subcomponents such as economic, social, and political globalization are important instruments to achieve a healthier society. In addition, higher levels of democracy lead to higher levels of life expectancy. Finally, GDP per capita growth improves health status of countries.

The findings obtained from our study show that economic, social, and political integration of countries and democracy accelerate the process of achieving a healthier society. Therefore, it is seen that SDG3 and SDG17 targets are compatible with each other. In order to achieve SDG3, economic, social, and political integration between countries should be encouraged and democratic institutions should be improved. Policy makers should remove the barriers on globalization, and they should promote participation on international organizations and public–private and civil society partnerships.

Those countries are Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, The Gambia, Haiti, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Togo.

Alam, M. S., Raza, S. A., Shahbaz, M., & Abbas, Q. (2016). Accounting for contribution of trade openness and foreign direct investment in life expectancy: The long-run and short-run analysis in Pakistan. Social Indicators Research, 129 (3), 1155–1170.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ali A, & Audi M (2016). The impact of income inequality, environmental degradation and globalization on life expectancy in Pakistan: An empirical analysis. MPRA Working Paper, No. 71112.

Bai, J., & Kao, C. (2006). On the estimation and inference of a panel cointegration model with cross-sectional dependence In panel data econometrics theoretical contributions and empirical applications . Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Google Scholar  

Baltagi, B. (2008). Econometric analysis of panel data . New York: Wiley.

Barlow, R., & Vissandjee, B. (1999). Determinants of national life expectancy. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d’études du développement, 20 (1), 9–29.

Beck, T., Maimbo, S. M., Faye, I., & Triki, T. (2011). Financing Through the crisis and beyond . Africa: The World Bank.

Book   Google Scholar  

Bergh, A., & Nilsson, T. (2010). Good for living? On the relationship between globalization and life expectancy. World Development, 38 (9), 1191–1203.

Besley, T., & Kudamatsu, M. (2006). Health and democracy. American Economic Review, 96 (2), 313–318.

Buss, P. M. (2002). Globalization and disease: In an unequal world, unequal health! Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 18, 1783–1788.

Chapman, A. R. (2009). Globalization, human rights, and the social determinants of health. Bioethics, 23 (2), 97–111.

Chudik A, & Pesaran, MH (2013) Large panel data models with cross-sectional dependence: a survey. CAFE Research Paper , (13.15).

Cohen, M. S., Chen, Y. Q., McCauley, M., Gamble, T., Hosseinipour, M. C., Kumarasamy, N., & Godbole, S. V. (2011). Prevention of HIV-1 infection with early antiretroviral therapy. New England journal of medicine, 365 (6), 493–505.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Cutler, D., Deaton, A., & Lleras-Muney, A. (2006). The determinants of mortality. Journal of economic perspectives, 20 (3), 97–120.

De Hoyos, R. E., & Sarafidis, V. (2006). Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. The stata journal, 6 (4), 482–496.

Deaton, A. (2004). Health in an age of globalization (No. w10669) . Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Dollar, D. (2001). Is globalization good for your health? Bulletin of the world Health Organization, 79, 827–833.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied economics, 38 (10), 1091–1110.

Dreher, A., & Gaston, N. (2008). Has globalization increased inequality? Review of International Economics , 16 (3), 516–536.

Dreher, A., Gassebner, M., & Siemers, L. H. (2012). Globalization, economic freedom, and human rights. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 56 (3), 516–546.

Franco, Á., Álvarez-Dardet, C., & Ruiz, M. T. (2004). Effect of democracy on health: Ecological study. BMJ, 329 (7480), 1421–1423.

Freedom House (2019). List of Electoral Democracies in 2019. https://freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world (Access Date: 11.13.2019).

Gelleny, R. D., & McCoy, M. (2001). Globalization and government policy independence: The issue of taxation. Political Research Quarterly, 54 (3), 509–529.

Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (2015). Globalization and growth. American Economic Review, 105 (5), 100–104.

Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm, J. E. (2019). The KOF globalisation index–revisited. The Review of International Organizations , 14 , 543–574.

Ha, E. (2012). Globalization, government ideology, and income inequality in developing countries. The journal of Politics, 74 (2), 541–557.

Halisçelik, E., & Soytas, M. A. (2019). Sustainable development from millennium 2015 to Sustainable Development Goals 2030. Sustainable Development, 27 (4), 545–572.

Harrison, A. (2006). Globalization and poverty (No. w12347) . Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Hu, F. B. (2011). Globalization of diabetes: the role of diet, lifestyle, and genes. Diabetes Care, 34 (6), 1249–1257.

Judge, K. (1995). Income distribution and life expectancy: A critical appraisal. BMJ, 311 (7015), 1282–1285.

Kabir, M. (2008). Determinants of life expectancy in developing countries. The journal of Developing areas, 41, 185–204.

Labonté, R., Schrecker, T., Packer, C., & Runnels, V. (Eds.). (2009). Globalization and health: Pathways, evidence and policy . Abingdon: Routledge.

Love, J. L. (1980). Raul Prebisch and the origins of the doctrine of unequal exchange. Latin American Research Review, 15 (3), 45–72.

Marshall, M. G., & Jaggers, K. (2002). Polity IV Project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800–2002: Dataset users’ manual . Maryland: University of Maryland.

Menyah, K., Nazlioglu, S., & Wolde-Rufael, Y. (2014). Financial development, trade openness and economic growth in African countries: New insights from a panel causality approach. Economic Modelling, 37, 386–394.

Or, Z. (2000). Determinants of health outcomes in industrialized countries: A pooled, cross-country, time-series analysis. OECD Economic Studies, 1, 53–78.

Owen, A. L., & Wu, S. (2007). Is trade good for your health? Review of International Economics, 15 (4), 660–682.

Patterson, A. C., & Veenstra, G. (2016). Politics and population health: Testing the impact of electoral democracy. Health & place, 40, 66–75.

Pesaran MH (2004) General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. CESifo Working Paper (No. 1229).

Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica , 74 (4), 967–1012.

Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of applied econometrics, 22 (2), 265–312.

Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142 (1), 50–93.

Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11 (1), 105–127.

Rao, B. B., & Vadlamannati, K. C. (2011). Globalization and growth in the low income African countries with the extreme bounds analysis. Economic Modelling, 28 (3), 795–805.

Safaei, J. (2006). Is democracy good for health? International Journal of Health Services, 36 (4), 767–786.

Saint Akadiri, S., Alola, A. A., Olasehinde-Williams, G., & Etokakpan, M. U. (2020). The role of electricity consumption, globalization and economic growth in carbon dioxide emissions and its implications for environmental sustainability targets. Science of The Total Environment, 708, 134653.

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom . New York: Knopf.

Shahbaz, M., Shafiullah, M., & Mahalik, M. K. (2019). The dynamics of financial development, globalisation, economic growth and life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa. Australian Economic Papers, 58 (4), 444–479.

Swamy, P. A. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 38, 311–323.

Swiss Economic Institute. (2020). KOF Globalization Index. https://kof.ethz.ch/en/forecasts-and-indicators/indicators/kof-globalisation-index.html (Access Date: December, 2019).

Tausch, A. (2015). Is globalization really good for public health? The International journal of health planning and management, 31 (4), 511–536.

The United Nations (2019). Sustainable Development Goal Indicators. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/Global%20Indicator%20Framework%20after%202019%20refinement_Eng.pdf (Access Date: 25.12.2019).

Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of cleaner production, 188, 144–157.

Welander, A., Lyttkens, C. H., & Nilsson, T. (2015). Globalization, democracy, and child health in developing countries. Social Science and Medicine, 136, 52–63.

Westerlund, J. (2007). Estimating cointegrated panels with common factors and the forward rate unbiasedness hypothesis. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 5 (3), 491–522.

Westerlund, J., & Edgerton, D. L. (2007). A panel bootstrap cointegration test. Economics Letters, 97 (3), 185–190.

World Bank (2019). World Development Indicators. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators (Access Date: December, 2019).

World Health Organization. (2016). Health in 2015: from MDGs to SDGs 2015 . Geneva: World Health Organization.

Zafar, M. W., Saud, S., & Hou, F. (2019a). The impact of globalization and financial development on environmental quality: Evidence from selected countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Environmental science and pollution research, 26 (13), 13246–13262.

Zafar, M. W., Shahbaz, M., Hou, F., & Sinha, A. (2019b). From nonrenewable to renewable energy and its impact on economic growth: The role of research & development expenditures in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation countries. Journal of cleaner production, 212, 1166–1178.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, Hatay, Turkey

Arif Eser Guzel, Unal Arslan & Ali Acaravci

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arif Eser Guzel .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Guzel, A.E., Arslan, U. & Acaravci, A. The impact of economic, social, and political globalization and democracy on life expectancy in low-income countries: are sustainable development goals contradictory?. Environ Dev Sustain 23 , 13508–13525 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01225-2

Download citation

Received : 30 April 2020

Accepted : 04 January 2021

Published : 18 January 2021

Issue Date : September 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01225-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Life expectancy
• Globalization
• Low-income countries
• Sustainable development
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How Does Globalization Impact Our Life? Unveiling 55+ Ways

By: Author Valerie Forgeard

Posted on September 4, 2023

Categories Society

Globalization is a transformative force that has deeply penetrated various facets of modern life.

While often discussed in terms of international trade or politics, the effects of globalization go far beyond economic or geopolitical dimensions; they seep into our daily lives, shaping how we think, interact, and consume.

From the technology we use to connect with others around the world, to the diverse range of foods in our supermarkets, globalization is a pervasive influence shaping the fabric of our existence.

This article will explore the myriad ways globalization impacts our lives—some of which may surprise you—offering a comprehensive look at how this complex phenomenon is more than just a buzzword, but rather a reality that affects each and every one of us.

Key Takeaways

• Globalization spreads businesses, ideas, and cultures worldwide, integrating societies.
• Globalization has benefits like improved communication and advanced technology, but also drawbacks such as economic disparity and cultural erosion.
• Globalization reshapes the trading landscape and creates interconnections between nations, fueling economic growth across diverse cultures and regions globally.
• Globalization significantly increases the volume and variety of goods available through international trade, benefiting consumers and businesses, but also posing new challenges that need to be balanced.

55 Ways Globalization Shapes Our Everyday Lives

Globalization is often thought of as an abstract concept, but its effects are very real and tangible, touching every facet of our daily lives.

From the food we eat to the technology we use, globalization has woven a complex web of interconnectivity that impacts us in ways we might not even realize.

55 Ways Globalization Impacts Our Life:

• Cultural Exchange: Easier access to international films, music, and art.
• Affordable Products: Lower-priced goods through economies of scale.
• Job Markets: More job opportunities in global corporations.
• Communication: Instant communication with people around the world via the internet.
• Media Influence: Global news coverage affects our perception of world events.
• Technology Transfer: Rapid spread of technological innovations.
• Increased Competition: Businesses compete on a global scale.
• Climate Change: Global industrialization impacts the environment.
• Education: International study programs and curricula.
• Immigration: Greater freedom to live and work in different countries.
• Global Health: Spread of medical knowledge and healthcare innovations.
• Tourism: Affordable international travel options.
• Language: The spread of languages like English as a global lingua franca.
• Social Movements: Global awareness and action on issues like human rights.
• Outsourcing: More businesses outsourcing services overseas.
• E-commerce: Online shopping from international retailers.
• Entertainment: Global blockbuster movies and TV shows.
• Financial Markets: The interconnectedness of global stock markets.
• Foreign Policy: More countries collaborating on global issues.
• Transnational Corporations: Brands and franchises globally recognized.
• Global Issues: Concerns such as terrorism know no borders.
• Transportation: Efficient and interconnected global transportation networks.
• Political Ideologies: Spread of political thoughts and systems.
• Cuisine: Availability of diverse global food options.
• Global Standards: International laws and regulations affecting local policies.
• Youth Culture: Global trends affecting local youth.
• Fast Fashion: Quick, global spread of fashion trends.
• Cybersecurity: International online threats and defenses.
• Intellectual Property: International patents and copyrights.
• Local Economies: Local businesses impacted by global corporations.
• Sustainability: Global pressure to adopt sustainable practices.
• Inflation and Economy: Global economic trends affecting local inflation rates.
• International Sports: Events like the Olympics unite countries.
• Customer Service: 24/7 service due to different time zones.
• Religion: Global spread of religious beliefs.
• Ethical Dilemmas: Global ethical questions affecting local choices.
• Social Media: Global social networking platforms.
• Public Transport: Technology and models adopted from other countries.
• Waste Management: Global trends influencing local waste policies.
• Data Storage: Cloud storage solutions based in various countries.
• Renewable Energy: International research impacts local energy solutions.
• Telemedicine: Access to global healthcare experts.
• Shipping and Logistics: Global supply chains affecting local availability.
• Music: Global music platforms and international music festivals.
• Urban Planning: Global trends in local city planning.
• Natural Disasters: International aid and support.
• Pharmaceuticals: Access to globally manufactured medicines.
• Dating: International dating apps and websites.
• Self-Expression: Global cultural influences on individual identities.
• Parenting: International parenting styles and products.
• Space Exploration: Global collaboration in outer space ventures.
• Virtual Reality: Globally produced VR content.
• Nutrition: Global nutrition trends and diets.
• Global Governance: International bodies affecting local laws.
• Mental Health: Global awareness affecting local mental health services.

Globalization isn’t just a buzzword; it’s a complex, multifaceted phenomenon that has a profound impact on our daily lives in more ways than we can count.

From the most mundane to the most critical aspects of our existence, globalization is a force that is shaping our world and our experience of it, whether we’re aware of it or not.

The challenge, then, is to harness its power for good, ensuring that while we enjoy the benefits, we also strive to mitigate the downsides.

Understanding the Concept of Globalization

Let’s first delve into understanding what globalization’s all about before we discuss its impact on our lives.

It’s a process where businesses, ideas, and cultures spread across the globe, integrating societies. Globalization challenges us to embrace diversity while it also offers many benefits like improved communication and advanced technology. However, it isn’t without drawbacks; economic disparity and cultural erosion are among them.

As you strive for freedom in your personal life, you might appreciate the way globalization enables more access to information and resources globally. But are you equally prepared to face the inequities it can exacerbate? This duality requires critical thought as we explore deeper.

Now that we’ve begun unraveling this complex tapestry of interconnectedness, let’s move forward to examine the role of globalization in the economy.

The Role of Globalization in Economy

As we delve deeper into the role of globalization in the economy, you’ll find that its influence on trade and economic growth is profound.

You’ll uncover how it’s reshaped the trading landscape, creating interconnections and dependencies between nations like never before.

Through a critical lens, we’ll explore how globalization has fueled economic growth across diverse cultures and regions globally, while also grappling with the challenges it brings to some economies.

Globalization’s Effect on Trade

You’re likely noticing that globalization has significantly increased the volume and variety of goods available to you, due in large part to its immense impact on international trade. This phenomenon is largely shaped by the loosening of trade regulations across multiple nations, fostering a more interconnected global market.

Freedom-seeking individuals like yourself have benefited greatly from this surge of diversity and accessibility. However, it’s crucial to note that while this provides a wealth of opportunities for consumers and businesses alike, it also presents new challenges.

As an informed, globally aware individual, you recognize the need for balance between embracing globalization’s benefits and mitigating its potential drawbacks. The quest for freedom doesn’t mean ignoring these complexities but rather understanding them better.

Globalization and Economic Growth

It’s evident that economic growth can be significantly boosted by the interconnectedness and open markets associated with globalization. You’ve seen businesses expand beyond borders, fostering innovation, efficiency, and economic development.

However, it’s crucial to acknowledge globalization’s drawbacks. Despite its benefits, globalization can pose challenges to local industries which can’t compete against global giants. They may see decreased sales or even closure as they struggle to match prices or output. It’s your local mom-and-pop shops that could suffer most.

Yet remember, you have power in this global arena too! By supporting local businesses and advocating for fair trade practices, you’re contributing to a balanced global marketplace. Globalization is a powerful tool for growth but ensuring its benefits are shared equitably requires informed consumers like you.

Globalization and Its Effect on Cultural Diversity

As you delve into the complex interplay between globalization and cultural diversity, you’ll confront the potential risks of cultural homogenization.

You’ll explore how languages are impacted by globalization, witnessing the threat it poses to linguistic diversity and the way it shapes our communication landscape.

Moreover, we’ll analyze strategies for preserving cultural identity amidst these global influences, assessing how societies can maintain their unique heritage and practices while participating in an increasingly interconnected world.

Cultural Homogenization Risks

Some people believe that globalization’s relentless push might risk making all cultures look the same, and that it could lead to homogenization effects and cultural erosion. The world’s diverse cultures, with their unique values and practices, may get diluted or lost.

Consider these potential dangers:

Homogenization effects

• Loss of diversity: As globalization spreads similar lifestyles and ideas, uniqueness in societies can diminish.
• Cultural dominance: Powerful cultures might overshadow smaller ones, risking their extinction.

Cultural erosion:

Traditions at stake: Traditional practices could fade as global influences increase.

Language disappearance: Native languages might fall into disuse due to the prevalence of global languages.

Globalization’s Impact on Languages

We’re seeing more languages disappear as a direct result of the world becoming more interconnected. This phenomenon, called language extinction, is directly linked to globalization.

Digital linguistics offers a unique perspective on this issue, showing how technology contributes to and could potentially slow this process.

You are at the heart of this change; your actions can make a difference. By understanding and respecting linguistic diversity, you uphold freedom – not just for yourself but also for marginalized communities worldwide.

This brings us to our next discussion point – preserving cultural identity. As we delve into it, remember that language preservation plays an integral role in this endeavor.

Preserving Cultural Identity

Cultural identity preservation is crucial in today’s rapidly changing world. It is greatly influenced by our efforts to maintain linguistic diversity. As the winds of globalization blow stronger, individuals may experience identity crisis issues due to cultural dilution. However, there are ways to combat this.

One way is to implement cultural preservation strategies. This can include revitalizing traditional arts and crafts, as well as promoting indigenous languages through education.

By employing these strategies, individuals are not just preserving a culture, but also strengthening their unique identity amidst the global melting pot. It is important to remember that cultural identity is not static, but constantly evolving. It requires active nurturing to survive and thrive in a globalized world.

Now, let’s delve into another facet of globalization: its impact on the environment.

The Impact of Globalization on Environment

It’s undeniable that globalization has significantly influenced environmental degradation through increased pollution, deforestation, and climate change. Being part of the global community, you’ve surely noticed this impact.

Worldwide, deforestation rates are skyrocketing due to international trade pressures for products like timber and palm oil. These actions not only destroy habitats but also contribute to climate change by releasing stored carbon dioxide.

Moreover, industrialized nations often exploit less developed countries’ resources, causing further harm. As a freedom seeker, it’s your responsibility to stay informed and make environmentally conscious decisions. This might mean supporting sustainable practices or advocating for fair trade policies.

As we delve into the subsequent section about ‘globalization and technological advancements’, consider how these innovations could potentially reverse some of the damage done or whether they might just exacerbate the issue.

Globalization and Technological Advancements

Having explored the environmental implications of globalization, let’s pivot to a different aspect: technological advancements.

Globalization fosters innovation and technology growth. However, it also deepens the digital divide and enhances technological dependency.

The digital divide refers to:

• The gap between those who can access modern information technology and those who can’t.
• This includes differences in broadband internet access, computer literacy, and opportunities for tech education.
• The disparity between developed and developing nations in utilizing digital tools for societal progression.

Technological Dependency is apparent when societies become overly reliant on advanced technologies.

As we delve into this topic further, remember: Seeking freedom means acknowledging these disparities so you can work towards a more equitable global tech landscape.

How Globalization Influences Political Relationships

You’re now stepping into the realm of political relationships and how they’re shaped by the global interconnections we’ve been discussing.

Globalization, as a catalyst for change, has fostered a new era, often referred to as global democracy. This concept is perceived as an extension of democratic ideals beyond national borders, where you can see nations sharing a commitment to transparency and openness in their political dealings.

Political transparency has become more than just an idea; it’s now a cornerstone of international relations. It’s essential to note that this phenomenon doesn’t necessarily mean universal agreement but rather offers platforms for constructive dialogues based on mutual respect and understanding.

As you explore further, you’ll soon encounter the social implications of globalization.

The Social Implications of Globalization

We’re now diving into the social implications of globalization, exploring how it’s reshaped societal norms and values worldwide. You’ve likely noticed these shifts yourself, as global migration patterns have dramatically transformed our communities.

Global migration patterns

• These movements often bring diverse cultures closer together, fostering a more interconnected world.
• However, they can also intensify social inequality issues as resources become unequally distributed.

Social inequality issues are another part of this complex puzzle. As you fight for freedom and seek justice:

Social Inequality Issues

• Remember that globalization can widen wealth gaps.
• But also remember it can provide opportunities to challenge and change these disparities.

Globalization is more than just a catchphrase or an academic concept—it’s a defining feature of our modern lives. Its impact is seen in everything from the food on our tables and the clothes on our backs to our job opportunities and perspectives on the world.

While globalization brings many benefits, such as technological advancements, cultural enrichment, and economic growth, it also presents challenges like environmental degradation, cultural homogenization, and economic inequality.

The influence of globalization is far-reaching, affecting virtually every facet of our existence. However, the complexity of its impact is not universally negative or positive; rather, it’s a mixed bag that demands our attention and understanding. By acknowledging both its boons and pitfalls, we can better equip ourselves to navigate this interconnected world and contribute to making it more equitable and sustainable for all.

Understanding how globalization impacts our lives is the first step toward leveraging its opportunities while mitigating its challenges.

This awareness serves as a tool, helping us to be more conscious consumers, empathetic global citizens, and informed participants in a world that is rapidly shrinking in terms of access, yet ever-expanding in its diversity and complexity.

So, as we continue to live in this globalized world, let’s strive not just to be passive spectators but active, informed participants.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does globalization affect the health sector and global health issues.

Globalization has a profound influence on healthcare, both positively and negatively. On the one hand, it facilitates the rapid exchange of medical knowledge and innovations, which can lead to better disease prevention and treatment options. On the other hand, it can exacerbate health inequalities, as access to these advancements is not uniformly distributed. The spread of diseases also becomes easier due to increased mobility.

What Role Does Media Play in the Process of Globalization?

Media serves as a powerful amplifier of globalization’s effects. It shapes public opinion, facilitates cultural exchange, and provides a platform for the dissemination of information across geographic and political boundaries. However, the media can also be a divisive force, perpetuating stereotypes and widening social inequalities, especially when access to information is unequal.

How Does Globalization Impact the Education System in Various Countries?

Globalization has a transformative effect on educational systems around the world, bringing both opportunities and challenges. It introduces new technologies and pedagogical approaches, thereby enriching educational experiences. However, it also highlights disparities in educational resources and access, which can exacerbate existing inequalities among countries and within their respective educational systems.

Does Globalization Impact the Global Food Supply and Food Security?

Absolutely, globalization has a major impact on food supply chains and food security. It facilitates a more efficient distribution of food, which in theory could lead to greater food security. However, this interconnectedness also makes local economies more vulnerable to global market fluctuations, impacting the stability of local food supplies.

Can Globalization Be Linked to the Rise or Decline of Certain Mental Health Issues Globally?

There is evidence to suggest that globalization can impact mental health, both positively and negatively. The rapid changes that globalization brings can cause stress and anxiety, particularly as traditional ways of life are disrupted. However, globalization can also bring awareness and resources to address mental health issues, breaking down the stigma often associated with them.

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

A Plus Topper

Improve your Grades

Impact of Globalization Essay | Essay on Impact of Globalization for Students and Children in English

February 13, 2024 by Prasanna

Impact of Globalization Essay: Since the decline of communalism, Globalization has become one of the most controversial and debating issues among people around the World. Globalization has a different definition to different people, and whether it has a positive impact today or was better for yesterday is still questionable. Although a part of the population questions its existence, it has significantly impacted both developed and developing countries’ economies. Globalization cannot simply be related to being political as it has had significant effects on cultural, ideological, and social aspects of people around the World.

To understand the impact of Globalization, it is important to know what it is. One of the popular political scientist, James Rosenau, described the term as a currently popular label and accounted for people’s norms, goods, ideas, services, activities, and currencies that are localized and practiced in a confined area. As per World Health Organization, Globalization is defined as the interdependence and interconnection of people in a local place with the people around the World. The two main elements that need to work here is the ease of flow of goods, services, and activities of people from one place to another and the incorporation and change in policies that allow the easy flow of exchange around the areas.

You can also find more  Essay Writing  articles on events, persons, sports, technology and many more.

Worldwide Interdependence

Globalization is a complex procedure that includes the trends and tendencies of the economic, cultural, and social spheres of the people and places around the World. The process is huge and not easily predictable but organized as well. The liberation of investment and trade, Social networks worldwide, technological innovation, and entrepreneurship are the four major factors of Globalization.

Many political scientists believe that the two major forces that make Globalization effective are technological innovation and entrepreneurship. However, it is impossible to prove that the process works without the intervention of other factors. With the adoption and evolution of market-related laws and policies in local and international fields, the governments have played a significant role by allowing economic integration of special activities and giving major independence to welcome the outside World. Globalization’s financial aspect is the major force that acts as a driving agent for both the political and social parts. Due to the colonization by Europe in various countries, some of the practices and cultural lifestyle is adopted by the people deep inside the African villages.

Globalization Plays a Role in the Worldwide Development

Globalization has made way for the countries to develop rapidly. However, the development is not even because some countries are growing quickly in comparison to others. The interconnection between the countries helped decrease poverty, but it does not equally support global community members. The developing countries lie in a depriving position while the developed countries enjoy all the interconnection benefits. However, when we take a close look at the impact of Globalization worldwide, we can conclude that it has both positive and negative effects on both developed and developing countries.

Globalization has proven to make a positive impact on the quality of life of people in developing countries. Funding from foreign countries and industrialized nations are helping many developing countries to decrease poverty. These funds are spent on improving the social, health, transport structure, and education of developing countries, helping them with a standard of living.

Today, the developing countries can openly communicate and trade through transport, labor, technology, management, and other benefits from other industrialized countries.

The impact of Globalization around the World

Globalization has its backdrops that dually affect both the developed and developing countries. However, considering the positive side to be heavier, people still believe it to be beneficial and aim for a better standard of living for all the poor people around the Globe.

World Trade and Globalizationz

According to political scientists, the impact of Globalization and trade on developing countries and industrialized countries is obvious that has a positive impact on the economic development of the nations. However, economic progress is not possible if the member countries and governments do not allow free trade flow without any limitations. The liberalization of trade will help the free flow of goods and services with an increasing profit to the producer country and the export countries. In the past decade, Uganda has proven to improve its economic situation by allowing free trade flow and restricting laws.

Trade is emerging as a trend in various underdeveloped and developing countries. With the reducing restrictions of trade, labor requirement and demand of manufacturers has risen. Many such industrialists migrate their business and production to developing countries, increasing employment and wealth among poor people. The hosting countries get several benefits from such a situation. Firstly, increase in employment opportunities as a lot of labor and workforce is required in industries. Import of new technology automatically activates with the welcome of new foreign sectors. Therefore, training local employees gives another opportunity for employment for the hosting countries. Often these foreign industries distribute their work and machine factories in various other countries and states. In such cases, the widespread chance of employment paves the way for Globalization.

Globalization Increases Competition Among Countries

With the increase in creativity and innovation, local and Global competition is an automatic result of Globalization. The competition among the producers ensures the quality of the product and the efficiency of producing goods. One of the major positive effects of Globalization is access to foreign interests, culture, and entertainment via music, movies, apparel, and television broadcasts. The cooperation among the government officials and the focus on similar goals has helped distribute knowledge among different underprivileged countries. With Globalization, the news and another kind of interactions can be done faster than expected.

However, with numerous positive effects of Globalization, there are several negative impacts as well, which the critics put together to criticize the concept in developing countries. According to reports of 2004, Globalization’s negative impact has no greater examples than countries like China and India.

Negative Impact of Globalization on Developing Countries

According to political scientists, the major negative impact of Globalization is poverty. Although it is said to have decreased poverty in developing countries, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, says that only a few countries are enjoying Globalization’s benefits. In contrast, most developing countries are left behind in the dark. It is not possible to evaluate the effect of Globalization on poverty. However, according to a survey, Sub Saharan Africa shows increased poverty by eighty-two million, central Asia and Europe by fourteen million, and the Caribbean and Latin America by eight million. However, Globalization alone is not responsible for poverty in developing countries, weak reforms, governance, lack of economic policies and ideas. Like Zygmunt Bauman, popular political figures claimed that Globalization makes the industrialized countries rich and the poor developing countries poorer.

Globalization helped several African colonies; however, today, most of them are dependent on large wealthy countries over the years. The African colonies are known for their largely consuming economy. The weak agricultural practice and growth make the overall economy worse in Africa. With the decline of trade and import facilities in the late 90s, the region’s per capita income has slowly reduced. The survey of social and economic conditions of Africa has an external debt of a million dollars.

Impact of Globalization on Health and Diseases

Globalization has made a serious impact on the hygiene of infectious and deadly diseases. It has given the developing countries the opportunity to restraint, prevent and eradicate the infection quickly. The reason why deadly diseases are increasing worldwide is because of the technological challenges that led to the increase of harmful emissions, resulting in global warming. The increase in mosquito breeding in open waters, bathing in pools, and other ways to be contaminated with the Schistosoma’s larvae might result in harmful diseases. With the use of western diets in developing countries, food-related diseases started increasing in the long run.

The western style that took place through Globalization has led the adults and the youth to lose their core values leading to several diseases like AIDS or HIV that have a long-term effect on the country’s society and economy. Before the liberalization came into practice, the coffee farmers of Uganda had a Coffee Marketing Board organized by the Government that worked as a middle man between the farmers and the foreign buyers. Even though the farmer’s infrastructure cost was to be paid, they were assured of a standard price. However, with the introduction of Globalization, Coffee making board was abolished, and the farmers had to shelter in the unpredictability of the world market.

Impact of Globalization on Employment

With the introduction of Globalization, the structure of employment opportunities in developing nations has taken a turn. Before the inception of Globalization, the main source of occupation and economy in developing countries was based on agriculture among both men and women. With the introduction of foreign industrial corporations, the section of people has shifted their occupation from agriculture and joined industries as laborers required for mass production. This led to a small scale of people working in the fields. Evidence shows the decrease of male workers in agricultural areas by sixty-two percent and the female workers by fourteen percent. The increasing unstable income and unemployment with no guarantee of their future result from the employment structure in the developing countries.

Globalization has led to mass unemployment as multinational companies outsource their services. The three main changes that Globalization leads people to are the changes in their income as laborers, changes in prices, and household production-consumption. Before Globalization, there was a difference between skilled and unskilled laborers. However, with serialization, the demand for educated workers gradually increased in the developing countries. Among several debates, the only conclusion found to be similar is that there has been the development of inequalities with Globalization in developing nations.

Impact of Globalization on Cultural Boundaries

Before Globalization came into existence, the native countries had their own culture and practices. It leads to the extinction of various native languages in developing countries. Today, people are keen to learn the common language around the Globe, English, and thus, the cessation of languages is taking place rapidly. The blend of western and local culture has led to the declination of cultural barriers, which has led people’s individuality and culture to fade away. The imbibing of extremist ideas and adaptation of multiple cultures has led to multiculturalism, causing terrorist attacks and suicide terrorism in countries like Sudan, Egypt, Tunisia, Somalia, and many more.

The free trade areas in the developing countries that welcome the foreign investors have turned to adapt more negative points than positives. The female workers of factories are physically and verbally abused to keep up with the foreign industrialists’ production demands, as mentioned in 2003, “The Hidden Face of Globalization”. To maximize production and profit, many multinational companies avoid maintaining a secure and safe environment for their workers. The Philco Ford assembly plant in Taiwan was recorded to kill twelve female workers due to toxic fumes. All these are also leading to a toxic environment harming the eco-friendly areas of the developing countries. Other than these, human trafficking, cheap labor, and other illegal practices are also a result of Globalization.

Impact of Globalization Essay Conclusion

Globalization is a complex procedure that is currently the topic of debate around the World. Since it has both positive and negative impacts on the developed and developing countries, many countries face economic wrath and a serious lack of growth and development. It is the leaders of developed countries’ responsibility to take measures and try to remove poverty from the developing countries and improve their style of living. Imposing various rational laws and reforms for a better guide of liberalization will help the developing countries. All the developing countries must get equal opportunities rather than focusing on a few countries to develop into a better country both in economy and health.

• Picture Dictionary
• English Speech
• English Slogans
• English Letter Writing
• English Essay Writing
• English Textbook Answers
• Types of Certificates
• ICSE Solutions
• Selina ICSE Solutions
• ML Aggarwal Solutions
• HSSLive Plus One
• HSSLive Plus Two
• Kerala SSLC
• Distance Education

• Economic Globalization: The Role of Geography Words: 2100
• Modern Imperialism and Economic Globalization Words: 1674
• Economic Globalization and Labour Rights Words: 4389
• Globalization, Its Defenders and Critics Words: 903
• Globalization and Its Consequences: Economic Crossroads Words: 3934
• Contemporary Globalization and Its Impact Words: 1108
• The Effect of Globalization in Economic Development Words: 621
• The Pitfalls of Globalization Words: 568
• Human Rights, Globalization and Economic Development Words: 1420
• Globalization and Businesses in New Economies Words: 2055

Economic Globalization and Daily Life

The stated factors belong to the concept of economic globalization, which implies the process through which states and corporations expand to the global scale. Globalization is a complex aspect, which affects and is impacted by cultural and political factors. Markets denote the combination of institutions, systems, infrastructures, systems, and procedures for exchange. In economics, alienation can be described as the isolation of people from functions of human nature because of stratified social classes. Global inequality is synonymous to alienation and it entails economic inequalities between countries (National Research Council, 2010). Together, these factors contribute to economic globalization, which affects daily life as reflected through access to information and markets, economic power and living standards, and job displacement and disappearance.

Globalization has enhanced technological development, which has facilitated such processes as efficient communication. The inception and development of the internet has facilitated various operations. For example, I can do online shopping, send and receive money both locally and internationally, and engage in online interactions such as social media interactions with my friends. Banking, online shopping, and communication are aspects of daily life. Technology has also enabled me access information through social media and Google. Access to markets entails ecommerce where I can purchase products and services online. For example, I recently purchased a smartphone on Amazon. In turn, technology affects living standards by creating opportunities. For instance, a person can learn about a job posting and apply for the post online. Moreover, Schwartz (2014) argues that people work to gain technology or skills, which are intangible values. However, Goldin (2009) warns that such technological advancements may not offer such benefits equally through alienation or limited access for some people such as those in the rural regions. Equally, technological advancement can contribute to job disappearance and displacement through the introduction of machinery. However, he also points that the recognition of this disparity and appropriate use of government power can inform strategies toward improving everyone’s quality of life through enhanced accessibility.

Goldin, I. (2009). Navigating our global future . TED Conferences. Web.

National Research Council. (2010). Understanding the changing planet: Strategic directions for the geographical sciences . National Academies Press.

Schwartz, B. (2014). The way we think about work is broken . TED Conferences. Web.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, February 10). Economic Globalization and Daily Life. https://studycorgi.com/economic-globalization-and-daily-life/

"Economic Globalization and Daily Life." StudyCorgi , 10 Feb. 2022, studycorgi.com/economic-globalization-and-daily-life/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Economic Globalization and Daily Life'. 10 February.

1. StudyCorgi . "Economic Globalization and Daily Life." February 10, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/economic-globalization-and-daily-life/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Economic Globalization and Daily Life." February 10, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/economic-globalization-and-daily-life/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Economic Globalization and Daily Life." February 10, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/economic-globalization-and-daily-life/.

This paper, “Economic Globalization and Daily Life”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: November 13, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Globalization / From Local to Global: My Perspective on Globalization

From Local to Global: My Perspective on Globalization

• Category: Social Issues , Economics
• Topic: Globalization , Income Inequality , Income Wealth Gap

Pages: 5 (2184 words)

Views: 1702

• Downloads: -->

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Immigration in America Essays

Economic Inequality Essays

Cosmetology Essays

Income Inequality Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->