American Arts Effect on the Rest of the World

Global Issues >> Globalization

Globalization

Globalization in General

Overall, it appears that Americans feel that globalization has a mixture of positive and negative impacts, with the positive ones moderately outweighing the negative ones. A bulk or plurality sees globalization in general as more than positive than negative. A majority sees globalization equally quite positive for the economy, American business, and consumers, but attitudes are less positive for American jobs and the environment. Merely a small minority favors resisting the procedure of globalization, though enthusiasm for promoting information technology seems to have waned in recent years. The public appears to be growing more familiar with the concept of globalization. Globalization is seen not but as an economic process, but equally a process of the world condign increasingly interconnected--and also every bit 1 in which values are condign more than oriented to a global context, and international institutions are playing a more than central role.

Overall, Americans view globalization as having a mixture of positive and negative elements, with the positive elements outweighing the negative ones. Positive responses to globalization vary from a plurality or pocket-sized majority to a large majority depending on how globalization is defined in a given question.

An October 2005 poll by the German Marshall Fund merely asked whether respondents have a favorable or unfavorable view of globalization. A plurality of 46% said they had a favorable view, while 36% said they had an unfavorable view. It is worth noting though that those who had a very unfavorable view (15%) were significantly greater than those who had a very favorable view (vii%).[1]

In PIPA's January 2004 poll, respondents were given a very wide definition of globalization that included economic science, communication, travel and culture. So they were asked to rate globalization using a calibration with null being completely negative, x being completely positive and 5 being every bit positive and negative. The average response was 5.62, downwards a fleck from when PIPA asked this question in October 1999 and found a mean response of 6.04

In 2004 40% rated globalization above 5, while just xix% rated it below 5, and 39% rated information technology at five, i.e., every bit positive and negative. In the 1999 poll, a small-scale majority of 53% rated it above 5, suggesting attitudes take cooled slightly in the by few years.

When asked well-nigh the term "globalization" only given no context or definition, attitudes are more positive. A September 2002 Pew poll found a solid majority of 62% saying it was a "very adept" (10%) or "somewhat adept" (52%) thing. Only 23% said it was bad. [2]

When asked about the affect of globalization on the United States a articulate majority gives a favorable rating. Since 1998, the Chicago Quango on Foreign Relations has asked a question in which it defines globalization as significant "specially the increasing connections of our economy with others around the world" and asks about its touch on on the The states. In July 2004 64% said information technology was "mostly good" and 31% said "by and large bad"-- the most positive reading this question has ever elicited. In 2002 and 1998, 56% and 54%, respectively, said information technology was mostly good. Responses of "by and large bad" in 2002 were 27% and in 1998 were 20%. Those volunteering the response "equally proficient and bad" dropped from fifteen% to 8% to none between 1998 and 2004, suggesting that more people have become familiar enough with the concept to have a view one style or another. [three]

The Women in International Merchandise survey, conducted by Epic-MRA in October 2001, posed ii detailed statements nearly the impact of economic globalization and asked respondents to choose the ane that was closer to their view. A plurality sided with the more than positive view. 40-eight percent chose the one that said:

Globalization has a positive affect because information technology enables the U.s.a. to increase trade in services, manufacturing, agricultural and food products, it enables Americans to buy cheaper and more abundant consumer goods, and information technology creates more U.Southward. jobs.

Xxx-five percent picked the other argument:

Globalization has a negative impact considering it exploits the developing world, denigrates the world's environments, and results in U.S. jobs being transferred to other countries.

Seventeen percent were undecided. [four]

An Oct 2000 Washington Postal service/Kaiser/Harvard survey asked whether "the globalization of the globe economic system is by and large proficient for the U.s., mostly bad for the U.s.a., or doesn't make much divergence." Thirty-viii per centum said information technology is mostly skilful, 22% felt it was mostly bad, and 25% said it does non make much difference. A relatively high 14% said they did not know or had not heard of globalization. [five]

Pew polls have also asked nearly the idea of globalization without actually using the term. This conception – "how do you feel about the world becoming more connected through greater economic trade and faster communication?" – elicits the nearly positive responses of all the general questions almost globalization. In May 2003, 79% said this was a good thing (including 30% very skilful), while just 16% said this was bad. An overwhelming 86% had a positive response to this question in September 2002.[half dozen]

Bear witness of a modestly positive orientation toward globalization is the public's negative view of anti-globalization protestors. A September 2002 Pew poll found that a plurality (49%) believed the "influence of anti-globalization protestors" on "the way things are going the United States was "bad". Xxx percent idea it was "good", with 21% maxim they didn't know. A June 2002 CCFR poll posed a feeling thermometer question about "protestors against globalization" and the public gave a mean rating of 45 on a scale of 0-100 (cool to warm).[6a]

When respondents are asked well-nigh the impact of globalization on them personally, they are too generally positive. A December 2003 PIPA poll asked respondents to think about the impact of globalization (defined equally "increased trade between countries in appurtenances, services and investment") on "you and your family's interests." Sixty-five pct felt the effects to exist positive and 32% said they were negative. A June 2002 CCFR poll found a slim majority (51%) saying globalization was good for "your own standard of living." Twenty-eight percent said information technology was bad. In the October 1999 PIPA poll, when respondents were asked how globalization is "for you lot personally" on a scale of 0 to ten, the mean response was 5.67-a flake lower than the score for globalization per se in the same poll. [seven] A February 2000 Belden, Russonello and Stewart survey asked, "Every bit the globe becomes more than interconnected, do you lot see more bug or more advantages for you personally?" Fifty-one percentage said they saw more advantages, while 38% saw more problems. [8]

Interestingly, when asked about the impact of globalization in the future, the response is substantially more positive. When asked in an October 1998 Penn, Schoen and Berland survey about the of globalization on them personally, fully one-half of respondents (l%) said it had not afflicted them. Merely of the remainder, positive responses outweighed negative ones by 2 to 1 (31% said it had helped them, while xv% said information technology had hurt). But when asked well-nigh the affect of "increasing trade and globalization," on their children a strong bulk (61%) felt that it would assist their children. Merely 18% felt increasing trade and globalization would be bad, and just 12% thought it would not affect them. [9]

Overall, attitudes well-nigh globalization are quite like to attitudes about international trade (see International Trade in General), though a bit more positive. As discussed below, Americans encounter globalization as something more complex than but merchandise.

Impact of Globalization on Specific Fronts

When asked about the impact of globalization on specific fronts, attitudes are quite differentiated. An April 2000 Harris poll and a 2002 CCFR survey asked whether globalization is positive or negative for a variety of areas. Majorities said globalization is skilful for the United states of america economy, American companies and consumers. Nonetheless, responses were substantially more than negative on the question of jobs and the surround. These responses are consistent with attitudes about international trade. Stronger majorities said that globalization is also skillful for "providing jobs and strengthening the economy in poor countries" and "democracy and human rights abroad." However, it should be noted that polls that have asked well-nigh the impact of international merchandise on poor countries have found less sanguine attitudes (see International Merchandise in General). Information technology is too hitting that trend lines on poll questions about the effects of globalization, where available, show a articulate increase in negative attitudes betwixt 2000 and 2002. [10]

Overall, do y'all think globalization is good or bad for...
	CCFR Jun 2002	Harris Apr 2000	Harris Dec 1999
…the U.s. (United States) economy?
Good	52%	64%	61%
Bad	30	28	29
...American companies?
Good	55%	63%	65%
Bad	30	29	25
...consumers similar y'all?
Practiced	55%	68%	65%
Bad	27	23	25
...providing jobs and strengthening the economy in poor countries?
Adept	64%	75%	70%
Bad	21	16	19
...creating jobs in the US (The states)?
Good	43%	50%	46%
Bad	41	42	45
...the environment?
Good	42%	45%	38%
Bad	37	38	44
... job security for American workers?
Practiced		32%
Bad		51
... maintaining cultural diverseness in the world?
Good		53%
Bad		28
... democracy and human rights abroad?
Expert		61%
Bad		20

One other aspect of globalization that does not appear to be particularly popular is foreign investment - an activity that has increased dramatically with globalization. The Oct 1999 PIPA poll asked a question nearly foreign investment, though it did non straight necktie it to globalization. When asked to choose between 2 statements, a slight majority (52%) say foreign investment in the U.s.a. is "dangerous because information technology allows outsiders too much control over our affairs." Forty-three percent said it "has a necessary and positive influence on our economy." [xi]

Public Supports Not Resisting Globalization, Says Can't Go Back

Information technology appears that a fairly strong majority favors non resisting the process of globalization. In the January 2004 PIPA poll, a strong majority of 59% thought the U.s.a. government should either "actively promote" globalization (19%) or "allow it to proceed" (40%). Only 38% favored trying to "slow it downwards" (29%) or "stop or reverse it" (9%). In that location is footling change in this overall attitude since 1999 when PIPA last asked the question, though a CCFR poll did find more lukewarm support in 2002. What does seem articulate is that the percent wanting to actively promote globalization has declined over fourth dimension (see graph below).[12]

1 possible explanation for what appears to be decreased enthusiasm for globalization is the idea that globalization is a long-term threat to the The states. In the June 2002 CCFR poll, 29% said globalization was a "disquisitional threat" to the "vital involvement of the United States in the next 10 years." Another 44% felt it was an "important but not critical threat". Only xv% said information technology wasn't an important threat. [12a]

Still, earlier polling has shown a full general consensus that the US has picayune pick just to encompass globalization. In the October 1999 PIPA poll, fifty-fifty among those who wanted to cease or reverse globalization (simply 9% of the total sample), a plurality said it was not possible. When posed two choices in the October 1998 Penn, Schoen and Berland survey, 60% felt the Us "could not turn away" from globalization "even if it wanted to"; just 36% chose the argument, "Information technology is not as well late to turn back from globalization and the Usa should concentrate on domestic interests." [12b]

Even afterward the terrorist attacks of September 11, the public did non perceive much slowing in the pace of globalization. In Dec 2001, the Pew Research Middle asked how much "the pace of globalization [had] recently been slowed." A slight bulk (52%) felt it had been slowed "hardly whatever" (30%) or "not at all" (22%). Forty percent felt it had been slowed "a lilliputian" and just 8% "a lot." And even amongst those who felt the pace of globalization had been slowed a petty or a lot, a strong majority (68%) felt the slowdown was a short-term phenomenon. Moreover, a strong majority (63%) of this group said that the slowing down of globalization was a "bad thing for ordinary people"; merely 32% felt it was a skillful matter. [thirteen]

Americans Increasingly Familiar With Globalization

Americans are also condign more familiar with the concept of globalization. In two ATIF polls from the early 1990s, more than than four in ten said they were not familiar enough with the idea to say how they felt about it, or expressed no opinion. In the 1999 PIPA poll, just 29% said they were not familiar with the concept of globalization. A poll past the Washington Post, Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard Academy during the 2000 presidential campaign asked how well respondents understood what candidates meant when they used the phrase "globalization of the world economy." Just 15 per centum said they either did non know or did non empathise the phrase at all. A solid bulk (57%) said they understood the phrase very well (18%) or fairly well (39%). Some other 28% understood it some, merely not too well. [xiv]

Consequent with these findings, a fairly strong majority believes globalization in general has had at least some touch on on them. A Feb 2000 Belden & Russonello survey institute 69% felt that globalization of "the economy, communication, wellness, environment, and other areas" had a cracking deal (33%) or some impact (36%) on them personally. Just 29% thought it had but a little impact (10%) or not much impact at all (19%). [xv]

What Globalization Means to Americans

In PIPA's Oct 1999 poll, respondents who had heard of the term 'globalization' (70% of sample) were asked to say what it meant to them. In various ways, virtually all responses described globalization as a growing interconnectedness of the world. As one respondent said, "It means we've go a more global guild, economically and politically, then decisions existence made here touch other areas, and other governments' decisions affect us." Said another, "Whatever happens in one land affects all countries." People made similar connections in the focus groups. In Baltimore, i human being called it "a big merging of everything…a single culture, a big openness; the Net…instant communication."

The dimensions of this interconnectedness varied. Near commonly cited was the economic dimension. One poll respondent said, "It means nosotros trade with everybody and everybody trades with us." Some other explained, "It ways that in business everybody all over the globe is connected monetarily."

All the same, this does not hateful globalization was seen as merely, or fifty-fifty primarily, an economic process. A flake more than half of survey respondents did non mention the economical dimension at all. A substantial number spoke in terms of values and norms. Equally ane respondent said, globalization is "looking at things in terms of the world instead of a unmarried country," while some other said information technology is "all countries united, working for a meliorate world." Others talked in terms of international institutions, for example defining globalization every bit "the United Nations and their [sic] influence." In a focus grouping, one woman said she believed globalization meant "respect for others, not necessarily for changing them but for respecting them where they are…I think that somehow we're all one."

Even though virtually views of globalization were positive on balance, the focus groups did bring to light some concerns near the increasing interconnectedness of the world. Naturally at that place was business concern near the threats to American jobs that come up with the growth of international merchandise. In addition some mentioned the faster spread of diseases, such as AIDS, while others brought up the possibility that outsiders may gain too much power in the Usa, or that countries will lose their individual identities. Some participants bristled at the notion of global government. As one man said, "Globalization as trade is good. Globalization as government is bad."

leanewithated1982.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/globalization/general.cfm

Share this post